Konstruktion und Concetto. Die römischen Katafalke für Kardinal Alessandro Farnese (1589), Papst Sixtus V. (1591) und Principe Carlo Barberini (1630)

In Rom entstand im ausgehenden 16. Jahrhundert die Gattung des „Tempietto-Katafalks“, eines Trauergerüsts in Form eines überkuppelten Zentralbaus, der anlässlich der feierlichen Exequien eines hochrangigen Verstorbenen die symbolische Totenbahre als anspruchsvolle ephemere Kleinarchitektur überfängt. Anhand dreier herausragender Beispiele, der Katafalke für Kardinal Alessandro Farnese, Papst Sixtus V. und Principe Carlo Barberini, sollen die architektonische Gestalt der Funeraltempietti und ihre symbolische Aussage näher beleuchtet werden. Dabei soll weniger die Ikonographie der figürlichen Ausstattung im Mittelpunkt stehen als vielmehr die “Sprachfähigkeit” der gewählten architektonischen Formen, die bei den hier vorgestellten römischen Katafalken ein zentraler Teil der Gesamtkonzepts ist. Dabei sind sowohl der Festanlass – die Memoria des verstorbenen Würdenträgers – als auch die Architektur selbst zum Thema gemacht.

BENCHMARKING AND IMPLEMENTATION OF A NEW INDEPENDENT MONTE CARLO DOSE CALCULATION QUALITY ASSURANCE AUDIT TOOL FOR CLINICAL TRIALS

Introduction Commercial treatment planning systems employ a variety of dose calculation algorithms to plan and predict the dose distributions a patient receives during external beam radiation therapy. Traditionally, the Radiological Physics Center has relied on measurements to assure that institutions participating in the National Cancer Institute sponsored clinical trials administer radiation in doses that are clinically comparable to those of other participating institutions. To complement the effort of the RPC, an independent dose calculation tool needs to be developed that will enable a generic method to determine patient dose distributions in three dimensions and to perform retrospective analysis of radiation delivered to patients who enrolled in past clinical trials. Methods A multi-source model representing output for Varian 6 MV and 10 MV photon beams was developed and evaluated. The Monte Carlo algorithm, know as the Dose Planning Method (DPM), was used to perform the dose calculations. The dose calculations were compared to measurements made in a water phantom and in anthropomorphic phantoms. Intensity modulated radiation therapy and stereotactic body radiation therapy techniques were used with the anthropomorphic phantoms. Finally, past patient treatment plans were selected and recalculated using DPM and contrasted against a commercial dose calculation algorithm. Results The multi-source model was validated for the Varian 6 MV and 10 MV photon beams. The benchmark evaluations demonstrated the ability of the model to accurately calculate dose for the Varian 6 MV and the Varian 10 MV source models. The patient calculations proved that the model was reproducible in determining dose under similar conditions described by the benchmark tests. Conclusions The dose calculation tool that relied on a multi-source model approach and used the DPM code to calculate dose was developed, validated, and benchmarked for the Varian 6 MV and 10 MV photon beams. Several patient dose distributions were contrasted against a commercial algorithm to provide a proof of principal to use as an application in monitoring clinical trial activity.

Why Monte Carlo Simulations are Inferences and not Experiments

Monte Carlo simulations arrive at their results by introducing randomness, sometimes derived from a physical randomizing device. Nonetheless, we argue, they open no new epistemic channels beyond that already employed by traditional simulations: the inference by ordinary argumentation of conclusions from assumptions built into the simulations. We show that Monte Carlo simulations cannot produce knowledge other than by inference, and that they resemble other computer simulations in the manner in which they derive their conclusions. Simple examples of Monte Carlo simulations are analysed to identify the underlying inferences.

More than just Good Luck. How to Explain the Success of Monte Carlo Simulations

Monte Carlo simulation is a powerful method in many natural and social sciences. But what sort of method is it? And where does its power come from? Are Monte Carlo simulations experiments, theories or something else? The aim of this talk is to answer these questions and to explain the power of Monte Carlo simulations. I provide a classification of Monte Carlo techniques and defend the claim that Monte Carlo simulation is a sort of inference.

Orazione funebre di Re Carlo Alberto detta nell' oratorio maggiore israelitico di Torino

da Lelio Cantoni

Saddlepoint approximations to sensitivities of tail probabilities of random sums and comparisons with Monte Carlo estimators

This article proposes computing sensitivities of upper tail probabilities of random sums by the saddlepoint approximation. The considered sensitivity is the derivative of the upper tail probability with respect to the parameter of the summation index distribution. Random sums with Poisson or Geometric distributed summation indices and Gamma or Weibull distributed summands are considered. The score method with importance sampling is considered as an alternative approximation. Numerical studies show that the saddlepoint approximation and the method of score with importance sampling are very accurate. But the saddlepoint approximation is substantially faster than the score method with importance sampling. Thus, the suggested saddlepoint approximation can be conveniently used in various scientific problems.

A critical evaluation of secondary cancer risk models applied to Monte Carlo dose distributions of 2-dimensional, 3-dimensional conformal and hybrid intensity-modulated radiation therapy for breast cancer

The comparison of radiotherapy techniques regarding secondary cancer risk has yielded contradictory results possibly stemming from the many different approaches used to estimate risk. The purpose of this study was to make a comprehensive evaluation of different available risk models applied to detailed whole-body dose distributions computed by Monte Carlo for various breast radiotherapy techniques including conventional open tangents, 3D conformal wedged tangents and hybrid intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). First, organ-specific linear risk models developed by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) and the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR) VII committee were applied to mean doses for remote organs only and all solid organs. Then, different general non-linear risk models were applied to the whole body dose distribution. Finally, organ-specific non-linear risk models for the lung and breast were used to assess the secondary cancer risk for these two specific organs. A total of 32 different calculated absolute risks resulted in a broad range of values (between 0.1% and 48.5%) underlying the large uncertainties in absolute risk calculation. The ratio of risk between two techniques has often been proposed as a more robust assessment of risk than the absolute risk. We found that the ratio of risk between two techniques could also vary substantially considering the different approaches to risk estimation. Sometimes the ratio of risk between two techniques would range between values smaller and larger than one, which then translates into inconsistent results on the potential higher risk of one technique compared to another. We found however that the hybrid IMRT technique resulted in a systematic reduction of risk compared to the other techniques investigated even though the magnitude of this reduction varied substantially with the different approaches investigated. Based on the epidemiological data available, a reasonable approach to risk estimation would be to use organ-specific non-linear risk models applied to the dose distributions of organs within or near the treatment fields (lungs and contralateral breast in the case of breast radiotherapy) as the majority of radiation-induced secondary cancers are found in the beam-bordering regions.

Combining Monte Carlo methods with coherent wave optics for the simulation of phase-sensitive X-ray imaging

Phase-sensitive X-ray imaging shows a high sensitivity towards electron density variations, making it well suited for imaging of soft tissue matter. However, there are still open questions about the details of the image formation process. Here, a framework for numerical simulations of phase-sensitive X-ray imaging is presented, which takes both particle- and wave-like properties of X-rays into consideration. A split approach is presented where we combine a Monte Carlo method (MC) based sample part with a wave optics simulation based propagation part, leading to a framework that takes both particle- and wave-like properties into account. The framework can be adapted to different phase-sensitive imaging methods and has been validated through comparisons with experiments for grating interferometry and propagation-based imaging. The validation of the framework shows that the combination of wave optics and MC has been successfully implemented and yields good agreement between measurements and simulations. This demonstrates that the physical processes relevant for developing a deeper understanding of scattering in the context of phase-sensitive imaging are modelled in a sufficiently accurate manner. The framework can be used for the simulation of phase-sensitive X-ray imaging, for instance for the simulation of grating interferometry or propagation-based imaging.

Forward treatment planning for modulated electron radiotherapy (MERT) employing Monte Carlo methods

PURPOSE This paper describes the development of a forward planning process for modulated electron radiotherapy (MERT). The approach is based on a previously developed electron beam model used to calculate dose distributions of electron beams shaped by a photon multi leaf collimator (pMLC). METHODS As the electron beam model has already been implemented into the Swiss Monte Carlo Plan environment, the Eclipse treatment planning system (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA) can be included in the planning process for MERT. In a first step, CT data are imported into Eclipse and a pMLC shaped electron beam is set up. This initial electron beam is then divided into segments, with the electron energy in each segment chosen according to the distal depth of the planning target volume (PTV) in beam direction. In order to improve the homogeneity of the dose distribution in the PTV, a feathering process (Gaussian edge feathering) is launched, which results in a number of feathered segments. For each of these segments a dose calculation is performed employing the in-house developed electron beam model along with the macro Monte Carlo dose calculation algorithm. Finally, an automated weight optimization of all segments is carried out and the total dose distribution is read back into Eclipse for display and evaluation. One academic and two clinical situations are investigated for possible benefits of MERT treatment compared to standard treatments performed in our clinics and treatment with a bolus electron conformal (BolusECT) method. RESULTS The MERT treatment plan of the academic case was superior to the standard single segment electron treatment plan in terms of organs at risk (OAR) sparing. Further, a comparison between an unfeathered and a feathered MERT plan showed better PTV coverage and homogeneity for the feathered plan, with V95% increased from 90% to 96% and V107% decreased from 8% to nearly 0%. For a clinical breast boost irradiation, the MERT plan led to a similar homogeneity in the PTV compared to the standard treatment plan while the mean body dose was lower for the MERT plan. Regarding the second clinical case, a whole breast treatment, MERT resulted in a reduction of the lung volume receiving more than 45% of the prescribed dose when compared to the standard plan. On the other hand, the MERT plan leads to a larger low-dose lung volume and a degraded dose homogeneity in the PTV. For the clinical cases evaluated in this work, treatment plans using the BolusECT technique resulted in a more homogenous PTV and CTV coverage but higher doses to the OARs than the MERT plans. CONCLUSIONS MERT treatments were successfully planned for phantom and clinical cases, applying a newly developed intuitive and efficient forward planning strategy that employs a MC based electron beam model for pMLC shaped electron beams. It is shown that MERT can lead to a dose reduction in OARs compared to other methods. The process of feathering MERT segments results in an improvement of the dose homogeneity in the PTV.

Monte Carlo based beam model using a photon MLC for modulated electron radiotherapy

PURPOSE Modulated electron radiotherapy (MERT) promises sparing of organs at risk for certain tumor sites. Any implementation of MERT treatment planning requires an accurate beam model. The aim of this work is the development of a beam model which reconstructs electron fields shaped using the Millennium photon multileaf collimator (MLC) (Varian Medical Systems, Inc., Palo Alto, CA) for a Varian linear accelerator (linac). METHODS This beam model is divided into an analytical part (two photon and two electron sources) and a Monte Carlo (MC) transport through the MLC. For dose calculation purposes the beam model has been coupled with a macro MC dose calculation algorithm. The commissioning process requires a set of measurements and precalculated MC input. The beam model has been commissioned at a source to surface distance of 70 cm for a Clinac 23EX (Varian Medical Systems, Inc., Palo Alto, CA) and a TrueBeam linac (Varian Medical Systems, Inc., Palo Alto, CA). For validation purposes, measured and calculated depth dose curves and dose profiles are compared for four different MLC shaped electron fields and all available energies. Furthermore, a measured two-dimensional dose distribution for patched segments consisting of three 18 MeV segments, three 12 MeV segments, and a 9 MeV segment is compared with corresponding dose calculations. Finally, measured and calculated two-dimensional dose distributions are compared for a circular segment encompassed with a C-shaped segment. RESULTS For 15 × 34, 5 × 5, and 2 × 2 cm(2) fields differences between water phantom measurements and calculations using the beam model coupled with the macro MC dose calculation algorithm are generally within 2% of the maximal dose value or 2 mm distance to agreement (DTA) for all electron beam energies. For a more complex MLC pattern, differences between measurements and calculations are generally within 3% of the maximal dose value or 3 mm DTA for all electron beam energies. For the two-dimensional dose comparisons, the differences between calculations and measurements are generally within 2% of the maximal dose value or 2 mm DTA. CONCLUSIONS The results of the dose comparisons suggest that the developed beam model is suitable to accurately reconstruct photon MLC shaped electron beams for a Clinac 23EX and a TrueBeam linac. Hence, in future work the beam model will be utilized to investigate the possibilities of MERT using the photon MLC to shape electron beams.

Salmo elegiaco in morte del re Carlo Alberto

composto in Ebraico e tradotto da Leilo Cantoni. Messo in musica dal Luigi De-Macchi il 13 settembre 1849

Monte Carlo modeling of polarized light propagation: Stokes vs Jones - Part I

This bipartite comparative study aims at inspecting the similarities and differences between the Jones and Stokes–Mueller formalisms when modeling polarized light propagation with numerical simulations of the Monte Carlo type. In this first part, we review the theoretical concepts that concern light propagation and detection with both pure and partially/totally unpolarized states. The latter case involving fluctuations, or “depolarizing effects,” is of special interest here: Jones and Stokes–Mueller are equally apt to model such effects and are expected to yield identical results. In a second, ensuing paper, empirical evidence is provided by means of numerical experiments, using both formalisms.

Monte Carlo modeling of polarized light propagation: Stokes vs Jones - Part II

In this second part of our comparative study inspecting the (dis)similarities between “Stokes” and “Jones,” we present simulation results yielded by two independent Monte Carlo programs: (i) one developed in Bern with the Jones formalism and (ii) the other implemented in Ulm with the Stokes notation. The simulated polarimetric experiments involve suspensions of polystyrene spheres with varying size. Reflection and refraction at the sample/air interfaces are also considered. Both programs yield identical results when propagating pure polarization states, yet, with unpolarized illumination, second order statistical differences appear, thereby highlighting the pre-averaged nature of the Stokes parameters. This study serves as a validation for both programs and clarifies the misleading belief according to which “Jones cannot treat depolarizing effects.”

The Utilization of Classical Spin Monte Carlo Methods to Simulate the Magnetic Behavior of Extended Three-Dimensional Cubic Networks Incorporating M(II) Ions with an S = 5/2 Ground State Spin

The numerical simulations of the magnetic properties of extended three-dimensional networks containing M(II) ions with an S = 5/2 ground-state spin have been carried out within the framework of the isotropic Heisenberg model. Analytical expressions fitting the numerical simulations for the primitive cubic, diamond, together with (10−3) cubic networks have all been derived. With these empirical formulas in hands, we can now extract the interaction between the magnetic ions from the experimental data for these networks. In the case of the primitive cubic network, these expressions are directly compared with those from the high-temperature expansions of the partition function. A fit of the experimental data for three complexes, namely [(N(CH3)4][Mn(N3)] 1, [Mn(CN4)]n 2, and [FeII(bipy)3][MnII2(ox)3] 3, has been carried out. The best fits were those obtained using the following parameters, J = −3.5 cm-1, g = 2.01 (1); J = −8.3 cm-1, g = 1.95 (2); and J = −2.0 cm-1, g = 1.95 (3).