ArticleJournal of biomedical optics2022
Two-step verification method for Monte Carlo codes in biomedical optics applications.
Article in Journal of biomedical optics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Comparative Review of the SWEET Simulator: Theoretical Verification Against Other Simulators.Journal of imaging · 2024Article
- Application limits of the scaling relations for Monte Carlo simulations in diffuse optics. Part 2: results.Optics express · 2024Article
- Impact of experimental setup parameters on the measurement of articular cartilage optical properties in the visible and short near-infrared spectral bands.Biomedical optics express · 2023Article
- Fluence rate directly derived from photon pathlengths: a tool for Monte Carlo simulations in biomedical optics.Biomedical optics express · 2023Article
- Principles, developments, and applications of spatially resolved spectroscopy in agriculture: a review.Frontiers in plant science · 2023Review
- Special Section Guest Editorial: Introduction to the Special Section Celebrating 30 years of Open Source Monte Carlo Codes in Biomedical Optics.Journal of biomedical optics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
significanceCode verification is an unavoidable step prior to using a Monte Carlo (MC) code. Indeed, in biomedical optics, a widespread verification procedure for MC codes is still missing. Analytical benchmarks that can be easily used for the verification of different MC routines offer an important resource.
aimWe aim to provide a two-step verification procedure for MC codes enabling the two main tasks of an MC simulator: (1) the generation of photons' trajectories and (2) the intersections of trajectories with boundaries separating the regions with different optical properties. The proposed method is purely based on elementary analytical benchmarks, therefore, the correctness of an MC code can be assessed with a one-sample t-test. APPROACH: The two-step verification is based on the following two analytical benchmarks: (1) the exact analytical formulas for the statistical moments of the spatial coordinates where the scattering events occur in an infinite medium and (2) the exact invariant solutions of the radiative transfer equation for radiance, fluence rate, and mean path length in media subjected to a Lambertian illumination.
resultsWe carried out a wide set of comparisons between MC results and the two analytical benchmarks for a wide range of optical properties (from non-scattering to highly scattering media, with different types of scattering functions) in an infinite non-absorbing medium (step 1) and in a non-absorbing slab (step 2). The deviations between MC results and exact analytical values are usually within two standard errors (i.e., t-tests not rejected at a 5% level of significance). The comparisons show that the accuracy of the verification increases with the number of simulated trajectories so that, in principle, an arbitrary accuracy can be obtained.
conclusionsGiven the simplicity of the verification method proposed, we envision that it can be widely used in the field of biomedical optics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.