An automated commissioning method based on virtual source models: Customizing Monte Carlo dose verification models for individual accelerators
Bo Cheng,Yuan Xu,Shijun Li,Qiang Ren,Xi Pei,Kuo Men,Jianrong Dai,Xie George Xu
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/mp.17418
IF: 4.506
2024-09-29
Medical Physics
Abstract:Background In pursuit of precise dose calculation and verification, the importance of beam modelling cannot be overstated, as it ensures an accurate distribution of particles incident upon the human body. The virtual source model, as one of the beam modelling methods, offers the advantage of not requiring detailed accelerator information. Although various virtual source models exist, manual adjustment to these models demands a substantial investment of time and computational resources. There has long been a desire to develop an efficient and automated approach for model commissioning. Purpose To develop an automatic commissioning method for the virtual source model to customize the accelerator model for independent Monte Carlo dose verification. Methods Initially, the accelerator model is established using the virtual source model and self‐developed Jaw and MLC models. Then, a fully automated iteration process is employed to adjust the parameters of the virtual source model. Three types of objective functions are designed to represent differences from water tank measurements. Each objective function is paired with a specific parameter for adjustment, and their effectiveness is demonstrated through physical evidence. In each iteration, parameters with the highest objective function percentage are chosen for adjustment, and step length is determined based on current objective function values. Iteration is terminated when changes in any direction from the optimal solution no longer produce an improvement. Dose verification model for nine accelerators has been accomplished using this method. Additionally, under the same initial conditions, verification models for Versa HD accelerator (FF and FFF modes) are established using this method, Nelder‐Mead Simplex optimization method, and the Bayesian optimization method to compare the efficiency and quality of these three iterative approaches. Results Iterations for all nine accelerators are completed within 30 iterations. The relative dose differences in dose fall‐off region compared to water tank measurements are all less than 2%, and the average gamma passing rates (3%/2 mm) for ArcCHECK measurements in QA plans are all higher than 97%. For Versa HD accelerator in FFF and FF modes, the proposed method achieves an average relative dose difference below 1% within 11 and 13 iterations, respectively. In contrast, the Simplex optimization reached 1% within 78 iterations in FFF mode. Furthermore, the Simplex optimization in FF mode and Bayesian optimization in both modes failed to achieve a 1% difference within 100 iterations. Conclusions The proposed iterative method achieves fast and automated commissioning of dose verification models, contributing to accurate and reliable clinical dose verification.
radiology, nuclear medicine & medical imaging