Follows a short description of some algorithms used in
Its purpose is
to give a basic understanding, for a more detailed
description please look up the appropriate publications.
cl, short for
This is the default algorithm.
It is based on the coordinate grid of the raster scanner
positions plus a water equivalent z-coordinate to account for
the depth. The width of each beam spot is accounted for
by distributing its intensity across its neighbours,
thereby establishing modified intensities in each raster position.
Dose calculation on the CT grid is performed by locating for each voxel its
4 neighbouring raster points and interpolating the modified intensities.
This method is fast and reasonably accurate.
It should, however, not be used for multifield optimization,
and does not give good results when CT and raster grid have
very different spacings.
ap, short for
This method takes into account explicitly all neighbouring
raster beam spots which may contribute to a given voxel.
The Gaussian shape of each beam spot is explicitly calculated
This method is more accurate than the
algorithm, but takes considerably longer time.
It should be used e.g. for multifield optimization or
irregular raster patterns.
ms, short for
This method works similar as
but takes into account the broadening of each beam spot
as a function of depth. It is more accurate than
but takes more time. At least for carbon it should be used only
for calculations at large depths.
which contain extra columns describing the beam broadening,
otherwise the results will be as for
cl, short for
This is the default, based on the original implementation
of the prescriptions of the LEM model.
Because internally random sampling of particle spectra
is used, the results show statistical fluctuations.
ld, short for
This is still according to the LEM model, but uses
approximations for therapeutic dose levels,
allowing to speedup spectral interpolations by about an
order of magnitude or more.
In addition, results are no longer subject to statistical
lowdose may be used for time consuming calculations,
e.g. multifield optimization.
This is the classical default used for single field optimization.
It uses an optimization grid based on a water-equivalent
grid in beams-eye-view, with simplifications allowing
fast optimization. It does not, however, include lateral
effects, cannot perform simultaneous multifield optimization.
This must be used for simultaneous multiple field optimization,
but may also be selected for a single field.
It is based on the grid of the given CT, and considers the given
target VOI plus OARs. It allows considerably better optimization,
but takes a lot more iterations (several hundred) than
H2Obased and eats a lot more memory
At present four algorithms can be used for optimization:
The algorithms give similar results,
bf, short for
gr, short for
(default, for historical reasons)
cg, short for
fr, short for
cg usually converges faster (by about a factor 2 to 3)
bf converges "smoother".
gr was introduced later,
it is the faster than
cg and also
more stable, so it should be preferred over this one.
As was found out recently,
fr converges yet faster than
by some factor four (for the same result), so if you're in a hurry,
take this one.
$Id: trip98alg.html,v 1.5 2011/03/08 19:02:40 kraemer Exp $
Impressum Data privacy protection