2009
DOI: 10.1118/1.3242304
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Physical models, cross sections, and numerical approximations used inMCNPandGEANT4Monte Carlo codes for photon and electron absorbed fraction calculation

Abstract: Even for simple problems as spheres and uniform radiation sources, the set of parameters chosen by any Monte Carlo code significantly affects the final results of a simulation, demonstrating the importance of the correct choice of parameters in the simulation.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Although GEANT4 is an almost validated code (8,17,22,31,41), but it is itself a new code and less experienced compared to older code like MCNP and not properly validated for internal dosimetry. GATE/ GENAT is partially validated for imaging applications (2,10,21,36) and has been used for dosimetry applications (28,38,39) but not validated for nuclear medicine dosimetry.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although GEANT4 is an almost validated code (8,17,22,31,41), but it is itself a new code and less experienced compared to older code like MCNP and not properly validated for internal dosimetry. GATE/ GENAT is partially validated for imaging applications (2,10,21,36) and has been used for dosimetry applications (28,38,39) but not validated for nuclear medicine dosimetry.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Yoriyaz et al investigated how different material compositions could affect photon and electron SAF calculations. 62 SAFs varied by up to *6% for electrons and 15.8% for photons when using the tissueequivalent composition defined by the MIRD Pamphlet No. 3 63,64 and with those from ICRU 44.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…2(a) and 2(b) for 20 and 30keV incident X-ray photons after transmitting through a 1µm PbTe PAL, respectively. These figures do not show the energy range of 0-1keV since there is a default artificial photon energy cutoff around 1keV in our MCNP simulation and important effects for scattering leading to lower energies are not yet included in MCNP6.2 photon transport methods, resulting in photon energies below the cutoff to not be calculated [29,30]. This cutoff tends to underestimate the photon absorption in Si because the mass attenuation coefficients of Si decreases with photon energy, as shown in Figs.…”
Section: (B)mentioning
confidence: 99%