Cargando…
Evaluation of a neural network‐based photon beam profile deconvolution method
PURPOSE: The authors have previously shown the feasibility of using an artificial neural network (ANN) to eliminate the volume average effect (VAE) of scanning ionization chambers (ICs). The purpose of this work was to evaluate the method when applied to beams of different energies (6 and 10 MV) and...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7324697/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32227629 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12865 |
Sumario: | PURPOSE: The authors have previously shown the feasibility of using an artificial neural network (ANN) to eliminate the volume average effect (VAE) of scanning ionization chambers (ICs). The purpose of this work was to evaluate the method when applied to beams of different energies (6 and 10 MV) and modalities [flattened (FF) vs unflattened (FFF)], measured with ICs of various sizes. METHODS: The three‐layer ANN extracted data from transverse photon beam profiles using a sliding window, and output deconvolved value corresponding to the location at the center of the window. Beam profiles of seven fields ranging from 2 × 2 to 10 × 10 cm(2) at four depths (1.5, 5, 10 and 20 cm) were measured with three ICs (CC04, CC13, and FC65‐P) and an EDGE diode detector for 6 MV FF and FFF. Similar data for the 10 MV FF beam was also collected with CC13 and EDGE. The EDGE‐measured profiles were used as reference data to train and test the ANNs. Separate ANNs were trained by using the data of each beam energy and modality. Combined ANNs were also trained by combining data of different beam energies and/or modalities. The ANN's performance was quantified and compared by evaluating the penumbra width difference (PWD) between the deconvolved and reference profiles. RESULTS: Excellent agreement between the deconvolved and reference profiles was achieved with both separate and combined ANNs for all studied ICs, beam energies, beam modalities, and geometries. After deconvolution, the average PWD decreased from 1–3 mm to under 0.15 mm with separate ANNs and to under 0.20 mm with combined ANN. CONCLUSIONS: The ANN‐based deconvolution method can be effectively applied to beams of different energies and modalities measured with ICs of various sizes. Separate ANNs yielded marginally better results than combined ANNs. An IC‐specific, combined ANN can provide clinically acceptable results as long as the training data includes data of each beam energy and modality. |
---|