4.6 Article

The impact of new Geant4-DNA cross section models on electron track structure simulations in liquid water

Journal

JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSICS
Volume 119, Issue 19, Pages -

Publisher

AMER INST PHYSICS
DOI: 10.1063/1.4950808

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. European Space Agency [BioRad II AO7146-4000107387/12/ NL/AK]
  2. program Projects of Large Research, Development, and Innovations Infrastructures (CESNET) [LM2015042]
  3. CNRS Greece-France Projet International de Cooperation Scientifique (PICS) [7340]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The most recent release of the open source and general purpose Geant4 Monte Carlo simulation toolkit (Geant4 10.2 release) contains a new set of physics models in the Geant4-DNA extension for improving the modelling of low-energy electron transport in liquid water (<10 keV). This includes updated electron cross sections for excitation, ionization, and elastic scattering. In the present work, the impact of these developments to track-structure calculations is examined for providing the first comprehensive comparison against the default physics models of Geant4-DNA. Significant differences with the default models are found for the average path length and penetration distance, as well as for dose-point-kernels for electron energies below a few hundred eV. On the other hand, self-irradiation absorbed fractions for tissue-like volumes and low-energy electron sources (including some Auger emitters) reveal rather small differences (up to 15%) between these new and default Geant4-DNA models. The above findings indicate that the impact of the new developments will mainly affect those applications where the spatial pattern of interactions and energy deposition of very-low energy electrons play an important role such as, for example, the modelling of the chemical and biophysical stage of radiation damage to cells. Published by AIP Publishing.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available