Monte Carlo calculation of organ dose coefficients for internal dosimetry: Results of an international intercomparison exercise.

EURADOS Working Group 6 has organized an intercomparison exercise on the use of the ICRP Reference Computational Phantoms with radiation transport codes. This paper summarizes the results of a specific task from the intercomparison exercise modelling internal radiation sources. The quantities to be calculated were absorbed fractions and specific absorbed fractions for monoenergetic photon and electron sources as well as S-values for two radionuclides in four source organs. Twelve participants from eleven countries participated in this specific task using the Monte Carlo radiation transport codes FLUKA, Geant4, the MCNP code family, PenEasy, TRIPOLI-4 and VMC. Although some participants provided initial solutions in good agreement with the master solution evaluated by the organizers, differences of factors or even orders of magnitude were also found. Following feedback from the organizer, most participants submitted revised solutions that were mostly in better agreement with the master solution, although this was not always the case. Some initial and revised results are discussed in detail in this paper, and the reasons of mistakes are described as far as they were revealed by the participants. A full account of all results is presented in specific annexes as supplemental material

Monte Carlo modelling for the in vivo lung monitoring of enriched uranium: Results of an international comparison

In order to assess the reliability of Monte Carlo (MC)-based numerical calibration of in vivo counting systems the EURADOS network supported a comparison of MC simulation of well-defined experiments. This action also provided training for the use of voxel phantoms. In vivo measurements of enriched uranium in a thoracic phantom have been carried out and the needed information to simulate these measurements was distributed to 17 participants. About half of the participants managed to simulate the measured counting efficiency without support from the organisers. Following additional support all participants managed to simulate the counting efficiencies within a typical agreement of ±5% with experiment. © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved