MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417358813 · doi:10.1016/j.ejmp.2025.105689

HetMS-MC: A framework for heterogeneous multiscale Monte Carlo modelling in radiation medicine

2025· article· en· W4417358813 on OpenAlexafffund
Elizabeth M. Fletcher, Rowan M. Thomson

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysica Medica · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicGas Dynamics and Kinetic Theory
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersAlliance de recherche numérique du CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsCarleton University
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodRadiationRadiation transportMedical radiation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Radiation medicine involves processes spanning many length scales and there is interest in modelling across scales to advance knowledge, particularly for prospective treatment approaches, e.g., gold nanoparticle-enhanced radiation therapy (GNPT). Previously, implementation of this type of multiscale modelling in radiation medicine has been problem-based, with little standardization and no established framework. PURPOSE: To introduce a framework for heterogeneous multiscale Monte Carlo (HetMS-MC) modelling in radiation medicine. METHODS: The presented framework includes considerations for the creation and analysis of HetMS-MC models, including model development, simulation setup, uncertainty analysis and quantification. The framework is demonstrated through two examples: (1) tumour model; (2) GNPT scenario. Both are implemented in EGSnrc and consist of a cm-scale tumour containing a region of interest comprised of 650 micron-scale cells in which specific energy is scored. RESULTS: The tumour model demonstrates the need for multiscale modelling as the HetMS-MC model captures differences in specific energy distributions from varying input parameters such as cell arrangement and MC random number seed that are not seen in conventional MC simulations. The GNPT model highlights the importance of multi-scale bridging in the development of HetMS-MC models. CONCLUSIONS: A general HetMS-MC framework is established and used to develop two models relevant to radiation medicine. This framework allows for efficient simulation of radiation physics processes across many length scales for arbitrary treatment modalities.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysica MedicaSame topicGas Dynamics and Kinetic TheoryFrench-language works237,207