Title of article :
A Comparison Between GATE and MCNPX Monte Carlo Codes in Simulation of Medical Linear Accelerator
Author/Authors :
sadoughi، hamid reza نويسنده Department of Medical Physics, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical sciences, Mashhad, Iran , , Nasseri، Shahrokh نويسنده Medical Physics Research Center, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran , , Momennezhad، Mahdi نويسنده Department of Medical Physics, Faculty of Medicine, Medical Physics Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran , , sadeghi، hamid reza نويسنده Department of Medical Physics, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical sciences, Mashhad, Iran , , Bahreyni Toosi، Mohammad Hossein نويسنده Department of Medical Physics, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical sciences, Mashhad, Iran ,
Issue Information :
فصلنامه با شماره پیاپی سال 2014
Abstract :
Radiotherapy dose calculations can be evaluated by Monte Carlo (MC) simulations with acceptable accuracy for dose prediction in
complicated treatment plans. In this work, Standard, Livermore and Penelope electromagnetic (EM) physics packages of GEANT4
application for tomographic emission (GATE) 6.1 were compared versus Monte Carlo N Particle eXtended (MCNPX) 2.6 in simulation
of 6 MV photon Linac. To do this, similar geometry was used for the two codes. The reference values of percentage depth dose (PDD)
and beam profiles were obtained using a 6 MV Elekta Compact linear accelerator, Scanditronix water phantom and diode detectors. No
significant deviations were found in PDD, dose profile, energy spectrum, radial mean energy and photon radial distribution, which were
calculated by Standard and Livermore EM models and MCNPX, respectively. Nevertheless, the Penelope model showed an extreme
difference. Statistical uncertainty in all the simulations was < 1%, namely 0.51%, 0.27%, 0.27% and 0.29% for PDDs of 10 cm2 by 10 cm2 filed size, for MCNPX, Standard, Livermore and Penelope models, respectively. Differences between spectra in various regions, in
radial mean energy and in photon radial distribution were due to different cross section and stopping power data and not the same
simulation of physics processes of MCNPX and three EM models. For example, in the Standard model, the photoelectron direction
was sampled from the Gavrila Sauter distribution, but the photoelectron moved in the same direction of the incident photons in the
photoelectric process of Livermore and Penelope models. Using the same primary electron beam, the Standard and Livermore EM
models of GATE and MCNPX showed similar output, but retuning of primary electron beam is needed for the Penelope model.
Journal title :
Journal of Medical Signals and Sensors (JMSS)
Journal title :
Journal of Medical Signals and Sensors (JMSS)