Monte Carlo based phase‐space evolution for electron dose calculation

Scora, Daryl; Faddegon, Bruce A.

doi:10.1118/1.597925

Cited by 10 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 19 publications

(17 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…More advanced analytical algorithms, such as pencilbeam redefinition algorithm ͑PBRA͒ ͑Refs. 121-125͒ and phase space evolution, [126][127][128][129] are capable of dose calculation accuracy similar to that of the above Monte Carlo algorithms. Boyd 125 showed that for typical patient cases, the dose calculation accuracy of the PBRA is essentially the same as EGS4 Monte Carlo dose calculations.…”

Section: Vib Dose Calculation Accuracymentioning

confidence: 94%

Recommendations for clinical electron beam dosimetry: Supplement to the recommendations of Task Group 25

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The goal of Task Group 25 (TG-25) of the Radiation Therapy Committee of the American Association of.Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) was to provide a methodology and set of procedures for a medical physicist performing clinical electron beam dosimetry in the nominal energy range of 5-25 MeV. Specifically, the task group recommended procedures for acquiring basic information required for acceptance testing and treatment planning of new accelerators with therapeutic electron beams. Since the publication of the TG-25 report, significant advances have taken place in the field of electron beam dosimetry, the most significant being that primary standards laboratories around the world have shifted from calibration standards based on exposure or air kerma to standards based on absorbed dose to water. The AAPM has published a new calibration protocol, TG-51, for the calibration of high-energy photon and electron beams. The formalism and dosimetry procedures recommended in this protocol are based on the absorbed dose to water calibration coefficient of an ionization chamber at 60Co energy, N60Co(D,w), together with the theoretical beam quality conversion coefficient k(Q) for the determination of absorbed dose to water in high-energy photon and electron beams. Task Group 70 was charged to reassess and update the recommendations in TG-25 to bring them into alignment with report TG-51 and to recommend new methodologies and procedures that would allow the practicing medical physicist to initiate and continue a high quality program in clinical electron beam dosimetry. This TG-70 report is a supplement to the TG-25 report and enhances the TG-25 report by including new topics and topics that were not covered in depth in the TG-25 report. These topics include procedures for obtaining data to commission a treatment planning computer, determining dose in irregularly shaped electron fields, and commissioning of sophisticated special procedures using high-energy electron beams. The use of radiochromic film for electrons is addressed, and radiographic film that is no longer available has been replaced by film that is available. Realistic stopping-power data are incorporated when appropriate along with enhanced tables of electron fluence data. A larger list of clinical applications of electron beams is included in the full TG-70 report available at http://www.aapm.org/pubs/reports. Descriptions of the techniques in the clinical sections are not exhaustive but do describe key elements of the procedures and how to initiate these programs in the clinic. There have been no major changes since the TG-25 report relating to flatness and symmetry, surface dose, use of thermoluminescent dosimeters or diodes, virtual source position designation, air gap corrections, oblique incidence, or corrections for inhomogeneities. Thus these topics are not addressed in the TG-70 report.

show abstract

Section: Vib Dose Calculation Accuracymentioning

confidence: 94%

Recommendations for clinical electron beam dosimetry: Supplement to the recommendations of Task Group 25

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The BEAM software 10 was extensively used for electron beam modeling. [11][12][13][14][15] Recently, a number of efforts were undertaken to completely characterize photon beams for specific accelerators by their PS data 16 and to compress the size of PS files by the use of beam models. 17 Storing the PS data normally requires several hundred MBs of disk space per beam.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Simple beam models for Monte Carlo photon beam dose calculations in radiotherapy

et al. 2000

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Monte Carlo (code GEANT) produced 6 and 15 MV phase space (PS) data were used to define several simple photon beam models. For creating the PS data the energy of starting electrons hitting the target was tuned to get correct depth dose data compared to measurements. The modeling process used the full PS information within the geometrical boundaries of the beam including all scattered radiation of the accelerator head. Scattered radiation outside the boundaries was neglected. Photons and electrons were assumed to be radiated from point sources. Four different models were investigated which involved different ways to determine the energies and locations of beam particles in the output plane. Depth dose curves, profiles, and relative output factors were calculated with these models for six field sizes from 5x5 to 40x40cm2 and compared to measurements. Model 1 uses a photon energy spectrum independent of location in the PS plane and a constant photon fluence in this plane. Model 2 takes into account the spatial particle fluence distribution in the PS plane. A constant fluence is used again in model 3, but the photon energy spectrum depends upon the off axis position. Model 4, finally uses the spatial particle fluence distribution and off axis dependent photon energy spectra in the PS plane. Depth dose curves and profiles for field sizes up to 10x10cm2 were not model sensitive. Good agreement between measured and calculated depth dose curves and profiles for all field sizes was reached for model 4. However, increasing deviations were found for increasing field sizes for models 1-3. Large deviations resulted for the profiles of models 2 and 3. This is due to the fact that these models overestimate and underestimate the energy fluence at large off axis distances. Relative output factors consistent with measurements resulted only for model 4.

show abstract

“…The pistil is made up of an ovoid, monocarpic, superior, monospermic, unilocular, white, and pubescent ovary, which ends in a short style with a globose stigma. Low fruit yield occurs because the stigmatia receive a few grains of fecundating pollen when the stamens and the pistils in each flower do not mature uniformly (Kopp 1966;Schroder 1952;Peterson 1956;Williams 1977;Bergh and Ellstrand 1986;Scora andBergh 1990, 1992;Scora et al 2002).…”

Section: Inflorescencementioning

confidence: 99%

Sustainable Horticultural Systems

Nandwani¹

2014

Sustainable Development and Biodiversity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This book series provides complete, comprehensive and broad subject based reviews about existing biodiversity of different habitats and conservation strategies in the framework of different technologies, ecosystem diversity, and genetic diversity. The ways by which these resources are used with sustainable management and replenishment are also dealt with. The topics of interest include but are not restricted only to sustainable development of various ecosystems and conservation of hotspots, traditional methods and role of local people, threatened and endangered species, global climate change and effect on biodiversity, invasive species, impact of various activities on biodiversity, biodiversity conservation in sustaining livelihoods and reducing poverty, and technologies available and required. The books in this series will be useful to botanists, environmentalists, marine biologists, policy makers, conservationists, and NGOs working for environment protection.More information about this series at

show abstract

Monte Carlo based phase‐space evolution for electron dose calculation

Cited by 10 publications

References 19 publications

Recommendations for clinical electron beam dosimetry: Supplement to the recommendations of Task Group 25

Recommendations for clinical electron beam dosimetry: Supplement to the recommendations of Task Group 25

Simple beam models for Monte Carlo photon beam dose calculations in radiotherapy

Sustainable Horticultural Systems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About