Speed and convergence properties of gradient algorithms for optimization of IMRT

被引:43
|
作者
Zhang, XD
Liu, H
Wang, XC
Dong, L
Wu, QW
Mohan, R
机构
[1] Univ Texas, MD Anderson Canc Ctr, Dept Radiat Phys, Houston, TX 77030 USA
[2] William Beaumont Hosp, Dept Radiat Oncol, Royal Oak, MI 48073 USA
关键词
IMRT; optimization; multi-objective; local minima; gradient;
D O I
10.1118/1.1688214
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Gradient algorithms are the most commonly employed search methods in the routine optimization of IMRT plans. It is well known that local minima can exist for dose-volume-based and biology-based objective functions. The purpose of this paper is to compare the relative speed of different gradient algorithms, to investigate the strategies for accelerating the optimization process, to assess the validity of these strategies, and to study the convergence properties of these algorithms for dose-volume and biological objective functions. With these aims in mind, we implemented Newton's, conjugate gradient (CG), and the steepest decent (SD) algorithms for dose-volume- and EUD-based objective functions. Our implementation of Newton's algorithm approximates the second derivative matrix (Hessian) by its diagonal. The standard SD algorithm and the CG algorithm with "line minimization" were also implemented. In addition, we investigated the use of a variation of the CG algorithm, called the "scaled conjugate gradient" (SCG) algorithm. To accelerate the optimization process, we investigated the validity of the use of a "hybrid optimization" strategy, in which approximations to calculated dose distributions are used during most of the iterations. Published studies have indicated that getting trapped in local minima is not a significant problem. To investigate this issue further, we first obtained, by trial and error, and starting with uniform intensity distributions, the parameters of the dose-volume- or EUD-based objective functions which produced IMRT plans that satisfied the clinical requirements. Using the resulting optimized intensity distributions as the initial guess, we investigated the possibility of getting trapped in a local minimum. For most of the results presented, we used a lung cancer case. To illustrate the generality of our methods, the results for a prostate case are also presented. For both dose-volume and EUD based objective functions, Newton's method far outperforms other algorithms in terms of speed. The SCG algorithm, which avoids expensive "line minimization," can speed up the standard CG algorithm by at least a factor of 2. For the same initial conditions, all algorithms converge essentially to the same plan. However, we demonstrate that for any of the algorithms Studied, starting with previously optimized intensity distributions as the initial guess but for different objective function parameters, the solution frequently gets trapped in local minima. We found that the initial intensity distribution obtained from IMRT optimization utilizing objective function parameters, which favor a specific anatomic structure, would lead to a local minimum corresponding to that structure. Our results indicate that from among the gradient algorithms tested, Newton's method appears to be the fastest by far. Different gradient algorithms have the same convergence properties for dose-volume- and EUD-based objective functions. The hybrid dose calculation strategy is valid and can significantly accelerate the optimization process. The degree of acceleration achieved depends on the type of optimization problem being addressed (e.g., IMRT optimization, intensity modulated beam configuration optimization, or objective function parameter optimization). Under special conditions, gradient algorithms will get trapped in local minima, and reoptimization, starting with the results of previous optimization, will lead to solutions that are generally not significantly different from the local minimum. (C) 2004 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.
引用
收藏
页码:1141 / 1152
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] First application of quantum annealing to IMRT beamlet intensity optimization
    Nazareth, Daryl P.
    Spaans, Jason D.
    PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2015, 60 (10): : 4137 - 4148
  • [42] Optimization and design of an aircraft's morphing wing-tip demonstrator for drag reduction at low speed, Part I - Aerodynamic optimization using genetic, bee colony and gradient descent algorithms
    Koreanschi, Andreea
    Gabor, Oliviu Sugar
    Acotto, Joran
    Brianchon, Guillaume
    Portier, Gregoire
    Botez, Ruxandra Mihaela
    Mamou, Mahmoud
    Mebarki, Youssef
    CHINESE JOURNAL OF AERONAUTICS, 2017, 30 (01) : 149 - 163
  • [43] Gradient-based algorithms for multi-objective bi-level optimization
    Yang, Xinmin
    Yao, Wei
    Yin, Haian
    Zeng, Shangzhi
    Zhang, Jin
    SCIENCE CHINA-MATHEMATICS, 2024, 67 (06) : 1419 - 1438
  • [44] A dose-gradient analysis tool for IMRT QA
    Moran, Jean M.
    Radawski, Jeffrey
    Fraass, Benedick A.
    JOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2005, 6 (02): : 62 - 73
  • [45] Linear convergence of inexact descent method and inexact proximal gradient algorithms for lower-order regularization problems
    Hu, Yaohua
    Li, Chong
    Meng, Kaiwen
    Yang, Xiaoqi
    JOURNAL OF GLOBAL OPTIMIZATION, 2021, 79 (04) : 853 - 883
  • [46] FINITE CONVERGENCE OF PROXIMAL-GRADIENT INERTIAL ALGORITHMS COMBINING DRY FRICTION WITH HESSIAN-DRIVEN DAMPING
    Adly, Samir
    Attouch, Hedy
    SIAM JOURNAL ON OPTIMIZATION, 2020, 30 (03) : 2134 - 2162
  • [47] Tradeoffs Between Convergence Rate and Noise Amplification for Momentum-Based Accelerated Optimization Algorithms
    Mohammadi, Hesameddin
    Razaviyayn, Meisam
    Jovanovic, Mihailo R.
    IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, 2025, 70 (02) : 889 - 904
  • [48] Performance of a hybrid MC dose algorithm for IMRT optimization dose evaluation
    Siebers, Jeffrey V.
    Kawrakow, Iwan
    Ramakrishnan, V.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2007, 34 (07) : 2853 - 2863
  • [49] Direct aperture optimization: A turnkey solution for step-and-shoot IMRT
    Shepard, DM
    Earl, MA
    Li, XA
    Naqvi, S
    Yu, C
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2002, 29 (06) : 1007 - 1018
  • [50] CONVERGENCE PROPERTIES OF PROXIMAL (SUB)GRADIENT METHODS WITHOUT CONVEXITY OR SMOOTHNESS OF ANY OF THE FUNCTIONS
    Solodov, Mikhail, V
    SIAM JOURNAL ON OPTIMIZATION, 2025, 35 (01) : 28 - 41