Back
 IJMPCERO  Vol.9 No.1 , February 2020
Examination of the Run-Time Differences between the EGSnrc and the EGS5 Monte Carlo Codes
Abstract: EGS5 Monte Carlo code is a general-purpose code for calculating photons and electrons transport for complex geometries in a wide range of energies. EGSnrc Monte Carlo code (BEAMnrc enclosed) was specially developed for medical physics usage, in particular for Linac modeling and dose calculations. Both EGS5 an EGSnrc were developed based on the former EGS4 code. For each of the codes, changes were made in the electron transport methods and in the geometrical utilities. Conformity between EGS5 calculation results and EGSnrc code results for Linac modelling was shown in recent work in our group. However, a large simulation run-time difference was found for the same conditions and statistical precision between these two codes. The EGS5 code took a longer period to obtain the same results compared to the EGSnrc code for Linac modelling. The electron transport in EGSnrc is based on the ESTEPE parameter, which is the maximum fractional energy loss per electron step. We investigated the ESTEPE parameter influence on the run-time and on the results accuracy. A set of variety simulations were performed using both codes in order to inspect the codes performance. We found that the EGSnrc run-time is strongly influenced by choosing different ESTEPE parameter values. While setting larger fractional energy losses per step, reduced simulation run-time was achieved. Hence, for optimal dose, one should define the optimal ESTEPE step-size parameter to achieve the desired dose results resolution. The use of the EGS5 code, based on the electron transport method improvements, is automatically adapted to the desired dose results quality without any user interference. Choosing the proper ESTEPE parameter for the use of EGSnrc for a given simulation resulted in similar run-time duration as with the use of EGS5. In conclusion, some cases that were tested in this study on the EGS5 and on the EGSnrc showed that the EGS5 is faster and more fluent to use between these two codes.
Cite this paper: Caduri, S. and Orion, I. (2020) Examination of the Run-Time Differences between the EGSnrc and the EGS5 Monte Carlo Codes. International Journal of Medical Physics, Clinical Engineering and Radiation Oncology, 9, 14-23. doi: 10.4236/ijmpcero.2020.91002.
References

[1]   Andreo, P. (2018) Monte Carlo Simulations in Radiotherapy Dosimetry. Radiation Oncology, 13, 121.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13014-018-1065-3

[2]   Hirayama, H., Namito, Y., Bielajew, A.F., Wilderman, S.J. and Nelson, W.R. (2005) The EGS5 Code System. SLAC-R-730 (2005) and KEK Report 2005-8 Japan.
https://doi.org/10.2172/877459

[3]   Walters, B., Kawrakow, I. and Rogers, D.W.O. (2016) BEAMnrc User’s Manual. NRCC Report PIRS-0509(A)revL, National Research Council of Canada, Ottawa.

[4]   Walters, B., Kawrakow, I. and Rogers, D.W.O. (2016) DOSXYZnrc User’s Manual. NRCC Report PIRS-794-revB, National Research Council of Canada, Ottawa.

[5]   Walters, B.R.B. and Kawrakow, I. (2007) A “HOWFARLESS” Option to Increase Efficiency of Homogeneous Phantom Calculations with DOSXYZnrc. Medical Physics, 34, 3794-3807.
https://doi.org/10.1118/1.2776258

[6]   Bielajew, A.F. and Rogers, D.W.O. (1992) A Standard Timing Benchmark for EGS4 Monte Carlo Calculations. Medical Physics, 19, 303-304.
https://doi.org/10.1118/1.596860

[7]   Andreo, P., Medin, J. and Bielajew, A.F. (1993) Constraints on the Multiple Scattering Theory of Moliere in Monte Carlo Simulations of the Transport of Charged Particles. Medical Physics, 20, 1315-1325.
https://doi.org/10.1118/1.596982

[8]   Holmes, M.A., Mackie, T.R., Sohn, W., Reckwerdt, P.J., Kinsella, T.J., Bielajew, A.F. and Rogers, D.W.O. (1993) The Application of Correlated Sampling to the Computation of Electron Beam Dose Distributions in Heterogeneous Phantoms Using the Monte Carlo Method. Physics in Medicine & Biology, 38, 675-688.
https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/38/6/003

[9]   Ma, C. and Jiang, S.T. (1999) Monte Carlo Modelling of Electron Beams from Medical Accelerators. Physics in Medicine & Biology, 44, R157-R189.
https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/44/12/201

[10]   Bielajew, A.F. and Rogers, D.W.O. (1986) PRESTA: The Parameter Reduced Electron-Step Transport Algorithm for Electron Monte Carlo Transport. National Research Council of Canada Report, Ottawa, PIRS-0042.

[11]   Bielajew, A.F. and Rogers, D.W.O. (1986) Interface Artefacts in Monte Carlo Calculations. Physics in Medicine & Biology, 31, 301-302.
https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/31/3/011

[12]   Bielajew, A.F. and Rogers, D.W.O. (1992) Implications of New Correction Factors on Primary Air Kerma Standards in 60Co Beams. Physics in Medicine & Biology, 37, 1283-1291.
https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/37/6/006

[13]   Bielajew, A.F. (1996) A Hybrid Multiple-Scattering Theory for Electron-Transport Monte Carlo Calculations. Nuclear Instruments and Methods B, 111, 195-208.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-583X(95)01337-7

[14]   Kawrakow, I. and Bielajew, A.F. (1998) On the Condensed History Technique for Electron Transport. Nuclear Instruments and Methods B, 142, 253-280.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-583X(98)00274-2

[15]   Kawrakow, I. and Bielajew, A.F. (1998) On the Representation of Electron Multiple Elastic-Scattering Distributions for Monte Carlo Calculations. Nuclear Instruments and Methods B, 134, 325-336.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-583X(97)00723-4

[16]   Ballinger, C.T., Cullen, D.E., Perkins, S.T., Rathkopf, J.A., Martin, W.R. and Wilderman, S.J. (1992) Single-Scatter Monte Carlo Compared to Condensed History Results for Low Energy Electrons. Nuclear Instruments and Methods, 72, 19-27.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-583X(92)95275-V

[17]   Kawrakow, I. (2000) Accurate Condensed History Monte Carlo Simulation of Electron Transport. I. EGSnrc, the New EGS4 Version. Medical Physics, 27, 485-498.
https://doi.org/10.1118/1.598917

[18]   Wilderman, S.J. and Bielajew, A.F. (2005) Modified Random Hinge Transport Mechanics and Multiple Scattering Step-Size Selection in EGS5 (KEK-PROC-2005-3).

[19]   Wilderman, S. (2006) Automated Electron Step Size Optimization in EGS5. Proceedings of the 13th EGS Users’ Meeting in Japan, Tsukuba, 1-13.

[20]   Lewis, H.W. (1950) Multiple Scattering in an Infinite Medium. Physical Review, 78, 526-529.
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.78.526

[21]   Rogers, D.W.O., Faddegon, B.A., Ding, G.X., Ma, C.M. and We, J. (1995) BEAM: A Monte Carlo Code to Simulate Radiotherapy Treatment Units. Medical Physics, 22, 503-524.
https://doi.org/10.1118/1.597552

[22]   Nevelsky, A. (2017) Dosimetric Characterization of an Applicator System for Intra-Operative Electron Irradiation. PHD Thesis (under the Supervision of Itzhak Orion), Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Eilat.

[23]   Rogers, D.W.O. (1993) How Accurately Can EGS4/PRESTA Calculate Ion-Chamber Response? Medical Physics, 20, 319-323.
https://doi.org/10.1118/1.597071

 
 
Top