1887
banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
A proposed alternative to phase-space recycling using the adaptive kernel density estimator method
Rent:
Rent this article for
USD
10.1118/1.2163250
/content/aapm/journal/medphys/33/2/10.1118/1.2163250
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aapm/journal/medphys/33/2/10.1118/1.2163250

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

A schematic showing the cylindrical coordinate geometry used for the preprocessing of the phase space variable. is the particle direction, is the component, is the - (planar) component, and is the azimuthal angle of w.r.t. the radial vector.

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

Overlay of scatter plots of various PS parameters: (a) radius vector versus polar angle and (b) Azimuthal angle of the planar component of the particle's direction versus radius vector .

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

In-air fluence analysis for the original PS distribution and AKDE generated distributions. Angular distributions and energy distributions were generated using a radius around the central axis. (a) Relative fluence versus radii (cm). (b) Central axis angular distribution as a function of angle (degrees). (c) Central axis energy distribution as a function of energy (MeV).

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

A comparison between benchmark calculation and ion-chamber (CC13) data for three field sizes , , and : (a) Transverse profiles. (b) Depth dose profiles. The relative uncertainty in the high dose region for the Monte Carlo calculation was less than in each voxel.

Image of FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.

Transverse profiles showing PS recycling, AKDE, and a benchmark calculation. % dose differences for PS recycling and AKDE with respect to the benchmark calculation has been shown for three field sizes: (a) , (b) , and (c) . The relative uncertainties in the high dose region for both AKDE and PS calculations were less than 1.2% , 0.9% , and 0.8% .

Image of FIG. 6.
FIG. 6.

Depth dose comparisons for PS recycling and AKDE with respect to the benchmark calculation. (a) The relative dose as a function of depth for a , , and field size. (b) % dose difference between the PS recycled run and the benchmark for a , , and field size. (c) % dose difference between AKDE and the benchmark for a , , and field size.

Tables

Generic image for table
TABLE I.

Global bandwidths for AKDE variables.

Generic image for table
TABLE II.

Correlation coefficients from the original PS distribution and KDE transformed PS distribution.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/aapm/journal/medphys/33/2/10.1118/1.2163250
2006-01-31
2014-04-18
Loading

Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: A proposed alternative to phase-space recycling using the adaptive kernel density estimator method
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aapm/journal/medphys/33/2/10.1118/1.2163250
10.1118/1.2163250
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM