Papers › OpenKBP-Opt: An international and reproducible evaluation of 76 knowledge-based...

OpenKBP-Opt: An international and reproducible evaluation of 76 knowledge-based planning pipelines

16 Feb 2022arXiv:2202.08303archive 2025-07-28

Aaron Babier, Rafid Mahmood, Binghao Zhang, Victor G. L. Alves, Ana Maria Barragán-Montero, Joel Beaudry, Carlos E. Cardenas, Yankui Chang, Zijie Chen, Jaehee Chun, Kelly Diaz, Harold David Eraso, Erik Faustmann, Sibaji Gaj, Skylar Gay, Mary Gronberg, Bingqi Guo, Junjun He, Gerd Heilemann, Sanchit Hira, Yuliang Huang, Fuxin Ji, Dashan Jiang, Jean Carlo Jimenez Giraldo, Hoyeon Lee, Jun Lian, Shuolin Liu, Keng-Chi Liu, José Marrugo, Kentaro Miki, Kunio Nakamura, Tucker Netherton, Dan Nguyen, Hamidreza Nourzadeh, Alexander F. I. Osman, Zhao Peng, José Darío Quinto Muñoz, Christian Ramsl, Dong Joo Rhee, Juan David Rodriguez, Hongming Shan, Jeffrey V. Siebers, Mumtaz H. Soomro, Kay Sun, Andrés Usuga Hoyos, Carlos Valderrama, Rob Verbeek, Enpei Wang, Siri Willems, Qi Wu, Xuanang Xu, Sen yang, Lulin Yuan, Simeng Zhu, Lukas Zimmermann, Kevin L. Moore, Thomas G. Purdie, Andrea L. McNiven, Timothy C. Y. Chan

We establish an open framework for developing plan optimization models for knowledge-based planning (KBP) in radiotherapy. Our framework includes reference plans for 100 patients with head-and-neck cancer and high-quality dose predictions from 19 KBP models that were developed by different research groups during the OpenKBP Grand Challenge. The dose predictions were input to four optimization models to form 76 unique KBP pipelines that generated 7600 plans. The predictions and plans were compared to the reference plans via: dose score, which is the average mean absolute voxel-by-voxel difference in dose a model achieved; the deviation in dose-volume histogram (DVH) criterion; and the frequency of clinical planning criteria satisfaction. We also performed a theoretical investigation to justify our dose mimicking models. The range in rank order correlation of the dose score between predictions and their KBP pipelines was 0.50 to 0.62, which indicates that the quality of the predictions is generally positively correlated with the quality of the plans. Additionally, compared to the input predictions, the KBP-generated plans performed significantly better (P<0.05; one-sided Wilcoxon test) on 18 of 23 DVH criteria. Similarly, each optimization model generated plans that satisfied a higher percentage of criteria than the reference plans. Lastly, our theoretical investigation demonstrated that the dose mimicking models generated plans that are also optimal for a conventional planning model. This was the largest international effort to date for evaluating the combination of KBP prediction and optimization models. In the interest of reproducibility, our data and code is freely available at https://github.com/ababier/open-kbp-opt.

Code

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

3 samples harvested; 0 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 3 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 0 of the 3 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 ababier/open-kbp-opt. “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.

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

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