Impact of field number and beam angle on functional image-guided lung cancer radiotherapy planning

To investigate the effect of beam angles and field number on functionally-guided intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) normal lung avoidance treatment plans that incorporate hyperpolarised helium-3 magnetic resonance imaging ((3)He MRI) ventilation data. Eight non-small cell lung cancer patients had pre-treatment (3)He MRI that was registered to inspiration breath-hold radiotherapy planning computed tomography. IMRT plans that minimised the volume of total lung receiving  ⩾20 Gy (V20) were compared with plans that minimised (3)He MRI defined functional lung receiving  ⩾20 Gy (fV20). Coplanar IMRT plans using 5-field manually optimised beam angles and 9-field equidistant plans were also evaluated. For each pair of plans, the Wilcoxon signed ranks test was used to compare fV20 and the percentage of planning target volume (PTV) receiving 90% of the prescription dose (PTV90). Incorporation of (3)He MRI led to median reductions in fV20 of 1.3% (range: 0.2-9.3%; p  =  0.04) and 0.2% (range: 0 to 4.1%; p  =  0.012) for 5- and 9-field arrangements, respectively. There was no clinically significant difference in target coverage. Functionally-guided IMRT plans incorporating hyperpolarised (3)He MRI information can reduce the dose received by ventilated lung without comprising PTV coverage. The effect was greater for optimised beam angles rather than uniformly spaced fields

Spatial comparison of CT-based surrogates of lung ventilation with hyperpolarized Helium-3 and Xenon-129 gas MRI in patients undergoing radiation therapy

Purpose To develop and apply an image acquisition and analysis strategy for spatial comparison of CT-ventilation images with hyperpolarized gas MRI. Methods 11 lung cancer patients underwent 129Xe and 3He ventilation MRI and co-registered 1H anatomical MRI. Expiratory and inspiratory breath-hold CTs were used for deformable image registration and calculation of three CT-ventilation metrics: Hounsfield unit (CTHU), Jacobian (CTJac) and specific gas volume change (CTSGV). Inspiration CT and hyperpolarized gas ventilation MRI were registered via same-breath anatomical 1H-MRI. Voxel-wise Spearman correlation coefficients were calculated between each CT-ventilation image and its corresponding 3He/129Xe-MRI, and for the mean values in regions of interest (ROIs) ranging from fine to coarse in-plane dimensions of 5x5, 10x10, 15x15 and 20x20, located within the lungs as defined by the same-breath 1H-MRI lung mask. Correlation of 3He and 129Xe-MRI was also assessed. Results Spatial correlation of CT-ventilation against 3He/129Xe-MRI increased with ROI size. For example, for CTHU, mean±SD Spearman coefficients were 0.37±0.19/0.33±0.17 at the voxel-level and 0.52±0.20/0.51±0.18 for 20x20 ROIs, respectively. Correlations were stronger for CTHU than for CTJac or CTSGV. Correlation of 3He with 129Xe-MRI was consistently higher than either gas against CT-ventilation maps over all ROIs (p<0.05). No significant differences were observed between CT-ventilation vs 3He-MRI and CT-ventilation vs 129Xe-MRI. Conclusion Comparison of ventilation-related measures from CT and registered hyperpolarized gas MRI is feasible at a voxel level using a dedicated acquisition and analysis protocol. Moderate correlation between CT-ventilation and MRI exists at a regional level. Correlation between MRI and CT is significantly less than between 3He and 129Xe-MRI, suggesting that CT-ventilation surrogate measures may not be measuring lung ventilation alone

Fitting the integrated Spectral Energy Distributions of Galaxies

Fitting the spectral energy distributions (SEDs) of galaxies is an almost universally used technique that has matured significantly in the last decade. Model predictions and fitting procedures have improved significantly over this time, attempting to keep up with the vastly increased volume and quality of available data. We review here the field of SED fitting, describing the modelling of ultraviolet to infrared galaxy SEDs, the creation of multiwavelength data sets, and the methods used to fit model SEDs to observed galaxy data sets. We touch upon the achievements and challenges in the major ingredients of SED fitting, with a special emphasis on describing the interplay between the quality of the available data, the quality of the available models, and the best fitting technique to use in order to obtain a realistic measurement as well as realistic uncertainties. We conclude that SED fitting can be used effectively to derive a range of physical properties of galaxies, such as redshift, stellar masses, star formation rates, dust masses, and metallicities, with care taken not to over-interpret the available data. Yet there still exist many issues such as estimating the age of the oldest stars in a galaxy, finer details ofdust properties and dust-star geometry, and the influences of poorly understood, luminous stellar types and phases. The challenge for the coming years will be to improve both the models and the observational data sets to resolve these uncertainties. The present review will be made available on an interactive, moderated web page (sedfitting.org), where the community can access and change the text. The intention is to expand the text and keep it up to date over the coming years.Comment: 54 pages, 26 figures, Accepted for publication in Astrophysics & Space Scienc

Energetic particle influence on the Earth's atmosphere

This manuscript gives an up-to-date and comprehensive overview of the effects of energetic particle precipitation (EPP) onto the whole atmosphere, from the lower thermosphere/mesosphere through the stratosphere and troposphere, to the surface. The paper summarizes the different sources and energies of particles, principally galactic cosmic rays (GCRs), solar energetic particles (SEPs) and energetic electron precipitation (EEP). All the proposed mechanisms by which EPP can affect the atmosphere are discussed, including chemical changes in the upper atmosphere and lower thermosphere, chemistry-dynamics feedbacks, the global electric circuit and cloud formation. The role of energetic particles in Earth’s atmosphere is a multi-disciplinary problem that requires expertise from a range of scientific backgrounds. To assist with this synergy, summary tables are provided, which are intended to evaluate the level of current knowledge of the effects of energetic particles on processes in the entire atmosphere

Alignment of the CMS silicon tracker during commissioning with cosmic rays

This is the Pre-print version of the Article. The official published version of the Paper can be accessed from the link below - Copyright @ 2010 IOPThe CMS silicon tracker, consisting of 1440 silicon pixel and 15 148 silicon strip detector modules, has been aligned using more than three million cosmic ray charged particles, with additional information from optical surveys. The positions of the modules were determined with respect to cosmic ray trajectories to an average precision of 3–4 microns RMS in the barrel and 3–14 microns RMS in the endcap in the most sensitive coordinate. The results have been validated by several studies, including laser beam cross-checks, track fit self-consistency, track residuals in overlapping module regions, and track parameter resolution, and are compared with predictions obtained from simulation. Correlated systematic effects have been investigated. The track parameter resolutions obtained with this alignment are close to the design performance.This work is supported by FMSR (Austria); FNRS and FWO (Belgium); CNPq, CAPES, FAPERJ, and FAPESP (Brazil); MES (Bulgaria); CERN; CAS, MoST, and NSFC (China); COLCIENCIAS (Colombia); MSES (Croatia); RPF (Cyprus); Academy of Sciences and NICPB (Estonia); Academy of Finland, ME, and HIP (Finland); CEA and CNRS/IN2P3 (France); BMBF, DFG, and HGF (Germany); GSRT (Greece); OTKA and NKTH (Hungary); DAE and DST (India); IPM (Iran); SFI (Ireland); INFN (Italy); NRF (Korea); LAS (Lithuania); CINVESTAV, CONACYT, SEP, and UASLP-FAI (Mexico); PAEC (Pakistan); SCSR (Poland); FCT (Portugal); JINR (Armenia, Belarus, Georgia, Ukraine, Uzbekistan); MST and MAE (Russia); MSTDS (Serbia); MICINN and CPAN (Spain); Swiss Funding Agencies (Switzerland); NSC (Taipei); TUBITAK and TAEK (Turkey); STFC (United Kingdom); DOE and NSF (USA)

Commissioning and performance of the CMS pixel tracker with cosmic ray muons

This is the Pre-print version of the Article. The official published verion of the Paper can be accessed from the link below - Copyright @ 2010 IOPThe pixel detector of the Compact Muon Solenoid experiment consists of three barrel layers and two disks for each endcap. The detector was installed in summer 2008, commissioned with charge injections, and operated in the 3.8 T magnetic field during cosmic ray data taking. This paper reports on the first running experience and presents results on the pixel tracker performance, which are found to be in line with the design specifications of this detector. The transverse impact parameter resolution measured in a sample of high momentum muons is 18 microns.This work is supported by FMSR (Austria); FNRS and FWO (Belgium); CNPq, CAPES, FAPERJ, and FAPESP (Brazil); MES (Bulgaria); CERN; CAS, MoST, and NSFC (China); COLCIENCIAS (Colombia); MSES (Croatia); RPF (Cyprus); Academy of Sciences and NICPB (Estonia); Academy of Finland, ME, and HIP (Finland); CEA and CNRS/IN2P3 (France); BMBF, DFG, and HGF (Germany); GSRT (Greece); OTKA and NKTH (Hungary); DAE and DST (India); IPM (Iran); SFI (Ireland); INFN (Italy); NRF (Korea); LAS (Lithuania); CINVESTAV, CONACYT, SEP, and UASLP-FAI (Mexico); PAEC (Pakistan); SCSR (Poland); FCT (Portugal); JINR (Armenia, Belarus, Georgia, Ukraine, Uzbekistan); MST and MAE (Russia); MSTDS (Serbia); MICINN and CPAN (Spain); Swiss Funding Agencies (Switzerland); NSC (Taipei); TUBITAK and TAEK (Turkey); STFC (United Kingdom); DOE and NSF (USA)

Performance of the CMS drift-tube chamber local trigger with cosmic rays

The performance of the Local Trigger based on the drift-tube system of the CMS experiment has been studied using muons from cosmic ray events collected during the commissioning of the detector in 2008. The properties of the system are extensively tested and compared with the simulation. The effect of the random arrival time of the cosmic rays on the trigger performance is reported, and the results are compared with the design expectations for proton-proton collisions and with previous measurements obtained with muon beams

Performance of the CMS Level-1 trigger during commissioning with cosmic ray muons and LHC beams

This is the Pre-print version of the Article. The official published version can be accessed from the link below - Copyright @ 2010 IOPThe CMS Level-1 trigger was used to select cosmic ray muons and LHC beam events during data-taking runs in 2008, and to estimate the level of detector noise. This paper describes the trigger components used, the algorithms that were executed, and the trigger synchronisation. Using data from extended cosmic ray runs, the muon, electron/photon, and jet triggers have been validated, and their performance evaluated. Efficiencies were found to be high, resolutions were found to be good, and rates as expected.This work is supported by FMSR (Austria); FNRS and FWO (Belgium); CNPq, CAPES, FAPERJ, and FAPESP (Brazil); MES (Bulgaria); CERN; CAS, MoST, and NSFC (China); COLCIENCIAS (Colombia); MSES (Croatia); RPF (Cyprus); Academy of Sciences and NICPB (Estonia); Academy of Finland, ME, and HIP (Finland); CEA and CNRS/IN2P3 (France); BMBF, DFG, and HGF (Germany); GSRT (Greece); OTKA and NKTH (Hungary); DAE and DST (India); IPM (Iran); SFI (Ireland); INFN (Italy); NRF (Korea); LAS (Lithuania); CINVESTAV, CONACYT, SEP, and UASLP-FAI (Mexico); PAEC (Pakistan); SCSR (Poland); FCT (Portugal); JINR (Armenia, Belarus, Georgia, Ukraine, Uzbekistan); MST and MAE (Russia); MSTDS (Serbia); MICINN and CPAN (Spain); Swiss Funding Agencies (Switzerland); NSC (Taipei); TUBITAK and TAEK (Turkey); STFC (United Kingdom); DOE and NSF (USA)

Performance of the CMS hadron calorimeter with cosmic ray muons and LHC beam data

This is the Pre-print version of the Article. The official published version of the Paper can be accessed from the link below - Copyright @ 2010 IOPThe CMS Hadron Calorimeter in the barrel, endcap and forward regions is fully commissioned. Cosmic ray data were taken with and without magnetic field at the surface hall and after installation in the experimental hall, hundred meters underground. Various measurements were also performed during the few days of beam in the LHC in September 2008. Calibration parameters were extracted, and the energy response of the HCAL determined from test beam data has been checked.This work is supported by FMSR (Austria); FNRS and FWO (Belgium); CNPq, CAPES, FAPERJ, and FAPESP (Brazil); MES (Bulgaria); CERN; CAS, MoST, and NSFC (China); COLCIENCIAS (Colombia); MSES (Croatia); RPF (Cyprus); Academy of Sciences and NICPB (Estonia); Academy of Finland, ME, and HIP (Finland); CEA and CNRS/IN2P3 (France); BMBF, DFG, and HGF (Germany); GSRT (Greece); OTKA and NKTH (Hungary); DAE and DST (India); IPM (Iran); SFI (Ireland); INFN (Italy); NRF (Korea); LAS (Lithuania); CINVESTAV, CONACYT, SEP, and UASLP-FAI (Mexico); PAEC (Pakistan); SCSR (Poland); FCT (Portugal); JINR (Armenia, Belarus, Georgia, Ukraine, Uzbekistan); MST and MAE (Russia); MSTDS (Serbia); MICINN and CPAN (Spain); Swiss Funding Agencies (Switzerland); NSC (Taipei); TUBITAK and TAEK (Turkey); STFC (United Kingdom); DOE and NSF (USA)

Performance of the CMS Level-1 trigger during commissioning with cosmic ray muons and LHC beams

This is the Pre-print version of the Article. The official published version can be accessed from the link below - Copyright @ 2010 IOPThe CMS Level-1 trigger was used to select cosmic ray muons and LHC beam events during data-taking runs in 2008, and to estimate the level of detector noise. This paper describes the trigger components used, the algorithms that were executed, and the trigger synchronisation. Using data from extended cosmic ray runs, the muon, electron/photon, and jet triggers have been validated, and their performance evaluated. Efficiencies were found to be high, resolutions were found to be good, and rates as expected.This work is supported by FMSR (Austria); FNRS and FWO (Belgium); CNPq, CAPES, FAPERJ, and FAPESP (Brazil); MES (Bulgaria); CERN; CAS, MoST, and NSFC (China); COLCIENCIAS (Colombia); MSES (Croatia); RPF (Cyprus); Academy of Sciences and NICPB (Estonia); Academy of Finland, ME, and HIP (Finland); CEA and CNRS/IN2P3 (France); BMBF, DFG, and HGF (Germany); GSRT (Greece); OTKA and NKTH (Hungary); DAE and DST (India); IPM (Iran); SFI (Ireland); INFN (Italy); NRF (Korea); LAS (Lithuania); CINVESTAV, CONACYT, SEP, and UASLP-FAI (Mexico); PAEC (Pakistan); SCSR (Poland); FCT (Portugal); JINR (Armenia, Belarus, Georgia, Ukraine, Uzbekistan); MST and MAE (Russia); MSTDS (Serbia); MICINN and CPAN (Spain); Swiss Funding Agencies (Switzerland); NSC (Taipei); TUBITAK and TAEK (Turkey); STFC (United Kingdom); DOE and NSF (USA)