[Gate-users] Physics lists for proton therapy

[Brent Huisman]

Hello Loic, Sonja,

I assume you are speaking about physicslists for dose?

The Geant4 collaboration at this time recommends something else, and here
at Creatis most use QGSP_BIC_HP as far as I know. See:
http://geant4.web.cern.ch/geant4/support/proc_mod_catalog/physics_lists/useCases.shtml

In addition, in Geant4 10 two new physicslists were introduced,
HADRONTHERAPY_1 and HADRONTHERAPY_2, the first of which is basically
QGSP_BIC_HP. I do not know who's actually tuning these lists though. See:
http://geant4.web.cern.ch/geant4/support/ReleaseNotes4.10.1.html

Loic, I've never heard of QBBC, why do you recommend it?

Physicslist tuning is indeed a bit opaque: not easy to know who optimizing
which lists for what. I would be very happy if we could spend a wiki-page
on it, even if it's just a list of who uses which physicslist and why.

Cheers,
Brent


Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2016 08:13:12 +0000
> From: Grevillot Loic <loic.grevillot at medaustron.at>
> To: "Schellhammer, Sonja" <s.schellhammer at hzdr.de>,
>         "gate-users at lists.opengatecollaboration.org"
>         <gate-users at lists.opengatecollaboration.org>
> Subject: Re: [Gate-users] Physics lists for proton therapy
> Message-ID:
>         <HE1PR04MB215675174A105E19BDB9FB759E1E0 at HE1PR04MB2156.eurprd
> 04.prod.outlook.com>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hello,
>
> New recommendations are proposed on the Gate Website (
> http://www.opengatecollaboration.org/UsersGuide)
> Currently we are working on the validation of QBBC_EMY at MedAustron, so I
> would recommend that one. (QBBC_EMZ is very similar as well)
>
> Best,
> Loïc
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gate-users [mailto:gate-users-bounces at lis
> ts.opengatecollaboration.org] On Behalf Of Schellhammer, Sonja
> Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:07 AM
> To: gate-users at lists.opengatecollaboration.org
> Subject: [Gate-users] Physics lists for proton therapy
>
> Dear colleagues,
>
> I am currently setting up a Geant4 model of our beam and choosing the
> physics lists.
> Does anyone of you have any experience (i.e. preferably has done
> measurements) on which of the lists are currently the most
> relevant/accurate ones for proton therapy? I am aware of Jarlskog 2008,
> Grevillot 2010 and Kurosu 2014, but looking for more recent results.
>
> Thanks for your input,
> Sonja Schellhammer
>
> --
> Sonja M. Schellhammer, MSc
> Institute of Radiooncology, Helmholtz-Zentrum Dresden-Rossendorf
> phone: +49 (0)351 458-7627, web: www.hzdr.de Händelallee 26, 01309
> Dresden, Germany Board of Directors: Prof. Dr. Dr. h. c. Roland Sauerbrey,
> Prof. Dr. Dr. h. c. Peter Joehnk Company Registration Number: VR 1693,
> Amtsgericht Dresden _______________________________________________
> Gate-users mailing list
> Gate-users at lists.opengatecollaboration.org
> http://lists.opengatecollaboration.org/mailman/listinfo/gate-users
> Disclaimer:
> Please notice our E-Mail Disclaimer http://www.medaustron.at/email
> -disclaimer/
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opengatecollaboration.org/mailman/private/gate-users/attachments/20160811/67237318/attachment.html>