<!DOCTYPE html>
<html><head>
<meta charset="UTF-8">
</head><body><p>Dear fellow GATE-users,<br><br>Have you seen the following articles on physics-list parameters to use in proton therapy?<br><br><a href="http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0031-9155/61/1/N1/meta">http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0031-9155/61/1/N1/meta</a><br><br><a href="http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1361-6560/aa6ce3/meta">http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1361-6560/aa6ce3/meta</a><br><br>What do you think? So far I have been using QBBC_EMY for my simulations, as this gave me the best agreement between the measured and simulated proton range. <br>It seems like the options she used are very close to the QBBC_EMZ, exect for the binary cascade models and the G4IonBinaryCascade.<br>Unfortunately, in GATE, we can't use QBBC_BIC_EMZ.<br>Also, when trying to use the recommendated self-built physics lists from the website, I get the warning that self-built lists won't be supported in future versions. So this seems not to be a longterm solution...<br><br>What are your thoughts on this? What physics lists are you using?<br><br>All the best,<br>Katrin Schnürle<br></p></body></html>