Papers › Automating High Quality RT Planning at Scale
Automating High Quality RT Planning at Scale
Riqiang Gao, Mamadou Diallo, Han Liu, Anthony Magliari, Jonathan Sackett, Wilko Verbakel, Sandra Meyers, Rafe McBeth, Masoud Zarepisheh, Simon Arberet, Martin Kraus, Florin C. Ghesu, Ali Kamen
Radiotherapy (RT) planning is complex, subjective, and time-intensive. Advances with artificial intelligence (AI) promise to improve its precision and efficiency, but progress is often limited by the scarcity of large, standardized datasets. To address this, we introduce the Automated Iterative RT Planning (AIRTP) system, a scalable solution for generating high-quality treatment plans. This scalable solution is designed to generate substantial volumes of consistently high-quality treatment plans, overcoming a key obstacle in the advancement of AI-driven RT planning. Our AIRTP pipeline adheres to clinical guidelines and automates essential steps, including organ-at-risk (OAR) contouring, helper structure creation, beam setup, optimization, and plan quality improvement, using AI integrated with RT planning software like Varian Eclipse. Furthermore, a novel approach for determining optimization parameters to reproduce 3D dose distributions, i.e. a method to convert dose predictions to deliverable treatment plans constrained by machine limitations is proposed. A comparative analysis of plan quality reveals that our automated pipeline produces treatment plans of quality comparable to those generated manually, which traditionally require several hours of labor per plan. Committed to public research, the first data release of our AIRTP pipeline includes nine cohorts covering head-and-neck and lung cancer sites to support an AAPM 2025 challenge. To our best knowledge, this dataset features more than 10 times number of plans compared to the largest existing well-curated public dataset. Repo: https://github.com/RiqiangGao/GDP-HMM_AAPMChallenge.
In Syntology View this paper on Syntology: its repositories, every harvested function with whether it ran, its licence and the call to fetch it.
Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2501.11803")
Code
Syntology Ran 7 of 8 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 1 has no recorded run. Of those that ran: 7 ran with no contract checked.
By repository: official repository: 8 samples from 1 repository, 7 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
8 samples harvested; 7 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 1 has no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-25; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.
Licence: 0 of the 8 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.
Harvested from riqianggao/gdp-hmm_aapmchallenge. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.
Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.
Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.
cf7c30e6ecf1126e · report
d5518e57b45eb6f1 · report
a2c8b38ba9393780 · report
6d4f034c282d16be · report
ee2a1a5f095583f0 · report
f309d2a1a999acd4 · report
a2df77bb085920ab · report
e0819cfef260f8b6 · report
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Methods
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections