Results of a Geant4 benchmarking study for bio‐medical applications, performed with the G4‐Med system
Authors: Arce Pedro , Archer Jay W. , Arsini Lorenzo , Bagulya Alexander , Bolst David , Brown Jeremy M. C. , Caccia Barbara , Chacon Andrew , Cirrone Giuseppe Antonio Pablo , Cortés‐Giraldo Miguel Antonio , Cutajar Dean , Cuttone Giacomo , Dondero Paolo , Dotti Andrea , Faddegon Bruce , Fattori Serena , Fedon Christian , Guatelli Susanna , Haga Akihiro , Incerti Sebastien , Ivanchenko Vladimir , Konstantinov Dmitri , Kyriakou Ioanna , Le Albert , Li Zhuxin , Maire Michel , Malaroda Alessandra , Mancini‐Terracciano Carlo , Mantero Alfonso , Michelet Claire , Milluzzo Giuliana , Nicolanti Francesca , Novak Mihaly , Omachi Chihiro , Pandola Luciano , Pensavalle Jake Harold , Perales Álvaro , Perrot Yann , Petringa Giada , Pozzi Silvia , Quesada José Manuel , Ramos‐Méndez José , Romano Francesco , Rosenfeld Anatoly B. , Safavi‐Naeini Mitra , Sakata Dousatsu , Sarmiento Luis G. , Sasaki Takashi , Sato Yoshihide , Sciuto Alberto , Sechopoulos Ioannis , Simpson Edward C. , Stanzani Ronny , Tomal Alessandra , Toshito Toshiyuki , Tran Hoang Ngoc , White Christopher , Wright Dennis H. 
Published: February 2025

Background

Geant4, a Monte Carlo Simulation Toolkit extensively used in bio‐medical physics, is in continuous evolution to include newest research findings to improve its accuracy and to respond to the evolving needs of a very diverse user community. In 2014, the G4‐Med benchmarking system was born from the effort of the Geant4 Medical Simulation Benchmarking Group, to benchmark and monitor the evolution of Geant4 for medical physics applications. The G4‐Med system was first described in our Medical Physics Special Report published in 2021. Results of the tests were reported for Geant4 10.5.

Purpose

In this work, we describe the evolution of the G4‐Med benchmarking system.

Methods

The G4‐Med benchmarking suite currently includes 23 tests, which benchmark Geant4 from the calculation of basic physical quantities to the simulation of more clinically relevant set‐ups. New tests concern the benchmarking of Geant4‐DNA physics and chemistry components for regression testing purposes, dosimetry for brachytherapy with a source, dosimetry for external x‐ray and electron FLASH radiotherapy, experimental microdosimetry for proton therapy, and in vivo PET for carbon and oxygen beams. Regression testing has been performed between Geant4 10.5 and 11.1. Finally, a simple Geant4 simulation has been developed and used to compare Geant4 EM physics constructors and physics lists in terms of execution times.

Results

In summary, our EM tests show that the parameters of the multiple scattering in the Geant4 EM constructor G4EmStandardPhysics_option3 in Geant4 11.1, while improving the modeling of the electron backscattering in high atomic number targets, are not adequate for dosimetry for clinical x‐ray and electron beams. Therefore, these parameters have been reverted back to those of Geant4 10.5 in Geant4 11.2.1. The x‐ray radiotherapy test shows significant differences in the modeling of the bremsstrahlung process, especially between G4EmPenelopePhysics and the other constructors under study (G4EmLivermorePhysics, G4EmStandardPhysics_option3, and G4EmStandardPhysics_option4). These differences will be studied in an in‐depth investigation within our Group. Improvement in Geant4 11.1 has been observed for the modeling of the proton and carbon ion Bragg peak with energies of clinical interest, thanks to the adoption of ICRU90 to calculate the low energy proton stopping powers in water and of the Linhard–Sorensen ion model, available in Geant4 since version 11.0. Nuclear fragmentation tests of interest for carbon ion therapy show differences between Geant4 10.5 and 11.1 in terms of fragment yields. In particular, a higher production of boron fragments is observed with Geant4 11.1, leading to a better agreement with reference data for this fragment.

Conclusions

Based on the overall results of our tests, we recommend to use G4EmStandardPhysics_option4 as EM constructor and QGSP_BIC_HP with G4EmStandardPhysics_option4, for hadrontherapy applications. The Geant4‐DNA physics lists report differences in modeling electron interactions in water, however, the tests have a pure regression testing purpose so no recommendation can be formulated.