{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01997245179063361, 'fraction_numerical': 0.002066115702479339, 'mean_word_length': 5.054166666666666, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
An experimental comparison of conventional two-bank and novel four-bank dynamic MLC tracking

The AccuLeaf mMLC featuring four multileaf-collimator (MLC) banks has been used for the first time for an experimental comparison of conventional two-bank with novel four-bank dynamic MLC tracking of a two-dimensional sinusoidal respiratory motion. This comparison was performed for a square aperture, and for three conformal treatment apertures from clinical radiotherapy lung cancer patients. The system latency of this prototype tracking system was evaluated and found to be 1.0 s and the frequency at which MLC positions could be updated, 1 Hz, and therefore accurate MLC tracking of irregular patient motion would be difficult with the system in its current form. The MLC leaf velocity required for two-bank-MLC and four-bank-MLC tracking was evaluated for the apertures studied and a substantial decrease was found in the maximum MLC velocity required when four-banks were used for tracking rather than two. A dosimetric comparison of the two techniques was also performed and minimal difference was found between two-bank-MLC and four-bank-MLC tracking. The use of four MLC banks for dynamic MLC tracking is shown to be potentially advantageous for increasing the delivery efficiency compared with two-bank-MLC tracking where difficulties are encountered if large leaf shifts are required to track motion perpendicular to the direction of leaf travel.