MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386851494 · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e20229

M-TAG: A modular teaching-aid for Geant4

2023· article· en· W4386851494 on OpenAlexafffund
Liam Carroll, Shirin A. Enger

Bibliographic record

VenueHeliyon · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Therapy and Dosimetry
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsDetectorModular designMonte Carlo methodRADIUSScintillatorRange (aeronautics)Computer sciencePhysicsPhotonSimulationRadiationComputational scienceComputational physicsNuclear physicsOpticsAerospace engineeringEngineeringMathematicsOperating systemStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Geant4 is a versatile Monte Carlo radiation transport simulation toolkit with a steep learning curve. This work introduces a user-code called M-TAG (Modular Radiation Teaching-Aid for Geant4), built on top of Geant4. M-TAG is designed to help gradually introduce the Geant4 toolkit to new users. The goal of Geant4 is to record quantities from the simulated radiation as it is transported through geometries. M-TAG simplifies the inclusion of new geometric elements and detector components in the simulation by including new classes. M-TAG also provides basic validated examples for some common detector development tasks. Geant4 intercom modules, called messenger classes, manage these classes. To validate M-TAG, simulations were performed to calculate the range of positrons in water. One hundred million decays at the center of a water-filled sphere with a radius of 1 m were allowed for fluorine-18, carbon-11, oxygen-15 and gallium-68. These results were compared to literature values. An inexperienced Geant4 user was tasked with creating a simulation model for a plastic scintillator-based detector and conducting basic tests to assess the effectiveness of M-TAG as a teaching tool. The simulation involved calculating the dose to the detector's sensitive volume using a 2x2 cm planar monoenergetic photon source spanning energies from 20 to 100 keV. One billion particles were simulated twice: once with the actual detector geometry and once with the sensitive volume replaced by water. The validity of M-TAG was also verified by computing dose ratios and comparing them with mass-attenuation ratios obtained from NIST XCOM data sets. The mean positron travel distances were within the distribution of literature values. Simulated positron energy spectra means were within 1.8% of literature means. Simulated dose ratios agreed with literature values within uncertainties. We have developed and verified a modular Geant4 teaching aid called M-TAG. It was used to introduce a new user to Geant4, who used it to perform further validation simulations.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.714
Threshold uncertainty score0.489

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.293 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHeliyonSame topicRadiation Therapy and DosimetryFrench-language works237,207