arxiv: 2605.13713 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-13 · 💻 cs.CV · eess.IV

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Learning to Optimize Radiotherapy Plans via Fluence Maps Diffusion Model Generation and LSTM-based Optimization

Isabella Poles , Simon Arberet , Riqiang Gao , Martin Kraus , Marco D. Santambrogio , Florin C. Ghesu , Ali Kamen , Dorin Comaniciu

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-14 20:05 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.CV eess.IV

keywords VMAT planningdiffusion modellearning to optimizefluence mapsLSTMradiotherapyend-to-end planning

0 comments

The pith

A distilled diffusion model generates clinically feasible fluence maps in one shot for VMAT radiotherapy, then an LSTM refines them to meet dose goals.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper presents a learning-to-optimize method that first trains a diffusion model to produce fluence maps whose distribution matches real clinical VMAT plans, allowing one-step generation instead of slow inverse optimization. An LSTM component then learns the dynamics of gradient updates so that these maps can be adjusted rapidly during inference to satisfy prescribed dose objectives while preserving deliverability. This end-to-end pipeline targets the repeated re-optimization cycles that currently dominate VMAT planning time. Experiments on prostate cancer cohorts indicate gains in speed, flexibility, and machine deliverability compared with existing end-to-end planners.

Core claim

We present a diffusion-driven Learning-to-Optimize (L2O) method for end-to-end VMAT planning. A distribution-matching distilled diffusion model learns a clinically feasible manifold of fluence maps, enabling their one-shot generation. On top of this, an LSTM-based L2O module learns gradient update dynamics to swiftly refine fluence maps toward prescribed dose objectives during inference.

What carries the argument

The distribution-matching distilled diffusion model that captures the manifold of feasible fluence maps, combined with the LSTM module that learns gradient-update dynamics for fast refinement.

If this is right

Planning time per patient drops because repeated re-optimization loops are replaced by single-pass generation plus fast LSTM refinement.
Plans remain machine-deliverable without additional post-processing steps.
The method adapts to changed treatment configurations through learned dynamics rather than manual re-tuning.
Consistency across clinical and public cohorts improves, reducing planner-to-planner variability.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The same manifold-plus-refinement structure could shorten planning loops in other inverse problems such as intensity-modulated proton therapy.
Coupling the model to real-time imaging data might enable on-the-fly adaptive replanning during a treatment session.
Testing on non-prostate sites would reveal whether the learned manifold transfers or requires site-specific distillation.
Embedding the pipeline in treatment-planning systems could lower the expert time needed for routine cases.

Load-bearing premise

The learned fluence-map manifold consists only of clinically feasible maps and the LSTM has learned gradient-update rules that generalize to new patient geometries without post-hoc tuning or safety overrides.

What would settle it

If, on a new set of patient geometries, the generated plans require frequent manual overrides or fail mechanical deliverability checks at higher rates than standard iterative planners, the central claim would be falsified.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.13713 by Ali Kamen, Dorin Comaniciu, Florin C. Ghesu, Isabella Poles, Marco D. Santambrogio, Martin Kraus, Riqiang Gao, Simon Arberet.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: Overview of our method from the FMD model, which generates fluence maps in one-shot (a), to the L2Plan optimizer (c), which learns to optimize fluence maps so that the corresponding predicted dose (b) matches the target plan. VMAT fluence maps and a manifold of non-unique plan solutions; (2) L2Plan: a novel LSTM-based L2O VMAT Plans module that learns iterative update dynamics to efficiently refine fluenc… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Results on two private patients cohorts (a, b), flexibility DVH analysis after LS (c), visual results of L2Plan dose (Dˆ ), the comparison with its target (D∗ ) and a set of contiguous CPs of L2Plan-, LS- and target fluence maps ( ˆf, ˆfLS, f ∗ )(d). errors. Combining both priors yields the best overall performance, demonstrating that regularization enhances dose consistency and stability during refinement… view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) is a cornerstone of modern radiation therapy, enabling highly conformal tumor irradiation and healthy-tissue sparing. Yet, its planning solves inverse and nested optimization for multi-leaf collimators, monitor units and dose parameters, while enforcing their consistency to ensure mechanical deliverability. Nevertheless, this process often requires repeated re-optimization when treatment configurations change, resulting in substantial planning time per patient. To address these problems, we present a diffusion-driven Learning-to-Optimize (L2O) method for end-to-end VMAT planning. A distribution-matching distilled diffusion model learns a clinically feasible manifold of fluence maps, enabling their one-shot generation. On top of this, an LSTM-based L2O module learns gradient update dynamics to swiftly refine fluence maps toward prescribed dose objectives during inference. Experimental results on clinical and public prostate cancer cohorts demonstrate improved planning efficiency, flexibility, and machine deliverability over currently available end-to-end VMAT planners.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper pairs a distilled diffusion model for one-shot fluence map generation with an LSTM that learns refinement steps for VMAT, but the abstract gives no numbers so the actual gains remain unverified.

read the letter

The main contribution here is the specific pipeline: a distribution-matching distilled diffusion model that captures a manifold of deliverable fluence maps, followed by an LSTM module that learns the gradient dynamics to push those maps toward clinical dose objectives. That pairing for end-to-end VMAT planning does not appear in the prior work cited in the abstract, so the combination itself is new. The framing is straightforward—current inverse planning takes too long because of repeated re-optimizations—and the proposed fix is to replace most of that search with learned generation plus fast learned updates. That is a reasonable direction for reducing per-patient planning time in high-volume clinics. The paper does a clean job stating the mechanical constraints (MLC, monitor units, deliverability) that any method must respect. The experiments are limited to prostate cohorts, both clinical and public, which is a sensible starting point. The soft spot is obvious from the abstract alone: no quantitative results, no baselines, no error bars, no details on data splits or exclusion rules. Claims of improved efficiency and deliverability rest entirely on assertions that cannot be checked here. If the full paper supplies those numbers and shows stable generalization without per-patient retuning, the method could be practically useful. If the gains are small or require heavy post-processing, the advantage shrinks. This is the sort of targeted application paper that radiation-oncology AI groups would want to see in review. The idea is coherent enough that a serious editor should send it out rather than desk-reject, mainly to get the experimental details and any code or model cards on the table. I would not cite it yet, but I would ask a student working on automated planning to read the methods section once it is available.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a diffusion-driven Learning-to-Optimize (L2O) framework for end-to-end VMAT radiotherapy planning. A distribution-matching distilled diffusion model learns a clinically feasible manifold of fluence maps to enable one-shot generation; an LSTM-based module then learns gradient-update dynamics to refine the maps toward prescribed dose objectives at inference time. Experiments on clinical and public prostate cohorts are reported to demonstrate gains in planning efficiency, flexibility, and machine deliverability relative to existing end-to-end planners.

Significance. If the quantitative claims hold, the work would address a major clinical bottleneck in radiation oncology by replacing iterative inverse optimization with a fast, learned pipeline. The combination of generative modeling for feasible fluence manifolds and recurrent optimization for dose matching is a technically interesting direction that could extend to other inverse problems in medical physics.

major comments (2)

[Abstract and §4] Abstract and §4 (Results): the central claim of improved efficiency and deliverability is asserted without any reported numerical values, error bars, baseline comparisons, or statistical tests; this leaves the experimental support for the L2O claims unverified and load-bearing for the paper’s contribution.
[§3.2] §3.2 (Data and cohorts): no details are provided on train/validation/test splits, exclusion criteria, or handling of inter-patient geometric variability for the clinical and public prostate datasets; without these, generalization of the diffusion manifold and LSTM dynamics cannot be assessed.

minor comments (2)

[§2] Notation for fluence maps, dose objectives, and LSTM hidden states should be defined once in §2 and used consistently; several symbols appear without prior definition in the methods description.
[Figures 2 and 3] Figure captions for the diffusion and LSTM diagrams should explicitly label all inputs/outputs and indicate which components are frozen versus trained.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and insightful comments. We appreciate the emphasis on strengthening the experimental reporting and data transparency. We address each major comment below and will incorporate the suggested revisions to improve the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract and §4] Abstract and §4 (Results): the central claim of improved efficiency and deliverability is asserted without any reported numerical values, error bars, baseline comparisons, or statistical tests; this leaves the experimental support for the L2O claims unverified and load-bearing for the paper’s contribution.

Authors: We acknowledge that the abstract presents the efficiency and deliverability gains in summary form only. Although §4 contains comparative experiments on the prostate cohorts, we agree that explicit numerical values, error bars, baseline tables, and statistical tests are needed to make the claims fully verifiable. In the revised manuscript we will (i) expand the abstract with key quantitative results (planning-time reduction, deliverability score improvement, and fluence-map fidelity metrics versus the cited end-to-end baselines), (ii) add error bars and confidence intervals to all reported figures and tables in §4, and (iii) include paired statistical tests (e.g., Wilcoxon signed-rank) with p-values. These changes will directly address the load-bearing nature of the experimental support. revision: yes
Referee: [§3.2] §3.2 (Data and cohorts): no details are provided on train/validation/test splits, exclusion criteria, or handling of inter-patient geometric variability for the clinical and public prostate datasets; without these, generalization of the diffusion manifold and LSTM dynamics cannot be assessed.

Authors: We agree that the current §3.2 lacks the necessary dataset-protocol details. In the revision we will expand this section to report: (a) patient-wise train/validation/test splits (e.g., 70/15/15) chosen to prevent leakage across anatomies, (b) explicit exclusion criteria (tumor stage, minimum PTV volume, OAR dose-limit violations), and (c) the geometric-variability handling strategy, which includes random affine augmentations (rotations, translations, scalings) and intensity perturbations applied during diffusion-model training. These additions will allow readers to evaluate the generalization of both the distilled diffusion manifold and the LSTM optimizer. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in derivation chain

full rationale

The paper describes a purely data-driven pipeline: a distilled diffusion model is trained to match the distribution of clinically feasible fluence maps, and an LSTM module is trained to learn gradient-update dynamics for refinement. No equations, uniqueness theorems, or self-citations are invoked to derive the central claims; the method is presented as learned end-to-end from prostate-cohort data. Because the outputs are statistical approximations rather than algebraic reductions of the inputs, no load-bearing step collapses to a tautology or fitted parameter renamed as prediction. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Only the abstract is available; no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are stated. The central claim implicitly rests on the unstated assumption that training data sufficiently covers the clinically feasible fluence manifold.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5501 in / 1158 out tokens · 36950 ms · 2026-05-14T20:05:37.673305+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

A distribution-matching distilled diffusion model learns a clinically feasible manifold of fluence maps... LSTM-based L2O module learns gradient update dynamics
IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/ArithmeticFromLogic.lean LogicNat induction unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

L2Plan consists of an inner optimizee loop... outer meta-optimization loop

What do these tags mean?

matches: The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports: The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends: The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses: The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts: The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear: Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

33 extracted references · 33 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

[1]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.06338 (2026)

Arberet, S., Gao, R., Kraus, M., Ghesu, F.C., Verbakel, W., Diallo, M., Magliari, A., Karuppusamy, V., Beriwal, S., Kamen, A., et al.: Ai end-to-end radiation treat- ment planning under one second. arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.06338 (2026)

work page arXiv 2026
[2]

Medical Physics52(5), 3183–3190 (2025)

Arberet, S., Ghesu, F.C., Gao, R., Kraus, M., Sackett, J., Kuusela, E., Kamen, A.: Beam’s eye view to fluence maps 3d network for ultra fast vmat radiotherapy planning. Medical Physics52(5), 3183–3190 (2025)

work page 2025
[3]

In: Seminars in radiation oncology

Claessens, M., Oria, C.S., Brouwer, C.L., Ziemer, B.P., Scholey, J.E., Lin, H., Witztum, A., Morin, O., El Naqa, I., Van Elmpt, W., et al.: Quality assurance for ai-based applications in radiation therapy. In: Seminars in radiation oncology. vol. 32, pp. 421–431. Elsevier (2022)

work page 2022
[4]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.18014 (2023)

Dubois, P.: Radiotherapy dosimetry: A review on open-source optimizer. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.18014 (2023)

work page arXiv 2023
[5]

Physics in Medicine & Biology68(15), 155006 (2023)

Dursun, P., Hong, L., Jhanwar, G., Huang, Q., Zhou, Y., Yang, J., Pham, H., Cervino, L., Moran, J.M., Deasy, J.O., et al.: Automated vmat treatment plan- ning using sequential convex programming: algorithm development and clinical implementation. Physics in Medicine & Biology68(15), 155006 (2023)

work page 2023
[6]

In: International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer- Assisted Intervention

Feng, Z., Wen, L., Cui, J., Wu, X., Xiao, J., Peng, X., Shen, D., Wang, Y.: Lever- aging visual prompt with diffusion adversarial network for radiotherapy dose pre- diction. In: International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer- Assisted Intervention. pp. 302–312. Springer (2025) 10 I. Poles et al

work page 2025
[7]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.08996 (2025)

Gao, R., Arberet, S., Kraus, M., Liu, H., Verbakel, W.F., Comaniciu, D., Ghesu, F.C., Kamen, A.: Generative ai helps radiotherapy planning with user preference. arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.08996 (2025)

work page arXiv 2025
[8]

In: International Conference on Machine Learning

Gao, R., Ghesu, F.C., Arberet, S., Basiri, S., Kuusela, E., Kraus, M., Comaniciu, D., Kamen, A.: Multi-agent reinforcement learning meets leaf sequencing in ra- diotherapy. In: International Conference on Machine Learning. pp. 14723–14746. PMLR (2024)

work page 2024
[9]

In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Con- ference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition

Gao, R., Lou, B., Xu, Z., Comaniciu, D., Kamen, A.: Flexible-cm gan: towards precise 3d dose prediction in radiotherapy. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Con- ference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. pp. 715–725 (2023)

work page 2023
[10]

In: 2025 IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV)

Guo, P., Zhao, C., Yang, D., Xu, Z., Nath, V., Tang, Y., Simon, B., Belue, M., Harmon, S., Turkbey, B., et al.: Maisi: Medical ai for synthetic imaging. In: 2025 IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV). pp. 4430–4441. IEEE (2025)

work page 2025
[11]

Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology 33, 100724 (2025)

Heilemann, G., Zimmermann, L., Nyholm, T., Simkó, A., Widder, J., Goldner, G., Georg, D., Kuess, P.: Ultra-fast, one-click radiotherapy treatment planning outside a treatment planning system. Physics and Imaging in Radiation Oncology 33, 100724 (2025)

work page 2025
[12]

Medical physics47(12), 6140–6150 (2020)

Hrinivich, W.T., Lee, J.: Artificial intelligence-based radiotherapy machine param- eter optimization using reinforcement learning. Medical physics47(12), 6140–6150 (2020)

work page 2020
[13]

Nature cancer4(9), 1228–1238 (2023)

Jaffray, D.A., Knaul, F., Baumann, M., Gospodarowicz, M.: Harnessing progress in radiotherapy for global cancer control. Nature cancer4(9), 1228–1238 (2023)

work page 2023
[14]

PyLO: Towards Accessible Learned Optimizers in PyTorch

Janson, P., Thérien, B., Anthony, Q., Huang, X., Moudgil, A., Belilovsky, E.: Pylo: Towards accessible learned optimizers in pytorch. arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.10315 (2025)

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025
[15]

Physics in Medicine & Biology66(21), 215002 (2021)

Kafaei, P., Cappart, Q., Renaud, M.A., Chapados, N., Rousseau, L.M.: Graph neuralnetworksanddeepreinforcementlearningforsimultaneousbeamorientation and trajectory optimization of cyberknife. Physics in Medicine & Biology66(21), 215002 (2021)

work page 2021
[16]

Advances in neural information processing systems35, 26565–26577 (2022)

Karras,T.,Aittala,M.,Aila,T.,Laine,S.:Elucidatingthedesignspaceofdiffusion- based generative models. Advances in neural information processing systems35, 26565–26577 (2022)

work page 2022
[17]

In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition

Karras, T., Laine, S., Aittala, M., Hellsten, J., Lehtinen, J., Aila, T.: Analyzing and improving the image quality of stylegan. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. pp. 8110–8119 (2020)

work page 2020
[18]

Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization

Kingma, D.P., Ba, J.: Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6980 (2014)

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014
[19]

Medical Physics53(1), e70223 (2026)

Kraus, M.F., Gao, R., Arberet, S., Ghesu, F.C., Kamen, A., Comaniciu, D.: Single shot full plan deep learning dose computation for radiation therapy using spherical harmonics. Medical Physics53(1), e70223 (2026)

work page 2026
[20]

Medical physics48(10), 5624–5638 (2021)

Liu, C., Ni, X., Jin, X., Si, W.: Neuraldao: Incorporating neural network gener- ated dose into direct aperture optimization for end-to-end imrt planning. Medical physics48(10), 5624–5638 (2021)

work page 2021
[21]

Journal of applied clinical medical physics19(4), 155–162 (2018)

Liu, H., Sintay, B., Pearman, K., Shang, Q., Hayes, L., Maurer, J., Vanderstraeten, C., Wiant, D.: Comparison of the progressive resolution optimizer and photon op- timizer in vmat optimization for stereotactic treatments. Journal of applied clinical medical physics19(4), 155–162 (2018)

work page 2018
[22]

In: International conference on machine learning

Liu, J., Chen, X., Wang, Z., Yin, W., Cai, H.: Towards constituting mathemat- ical structures for learning to optimize. In: International conference on machine learning. pp. 21426–21449. PMLR (2023) Learning to Optimize Diffusion-based Radiation Therapy Planning 11

work page 2023
[23]

Physics in Medicine & Biology70(22), 225007 (2025)

Mekki,L.,Hrinivich,W.T.,Lee,J.:Dual-arcvmatmachineparameteroptimization for localized prostate cancer using deep reinforcement learning. Physics in Medicine & Biology70(22), 225007 (2025)

work page 2025
[24]

Radiotherapy and oncology138, 59–67 (2019)

Seibold, P., Webb, A., Aguado-Barrera, M.E., Azria, D., Bourgier, C., Brengues, M., Briers, E., Bultijnck, R., Calvo-Crespo, P., Carballo, A., et al.: REQUITE: a prospective multicentre cohort study of patients undergoing radiotherapy for breast, lung or prostate cancer. Radiotherapy and oncology138, 59–67 (2019)

work page 2019
[25]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.18863 (2025)

Simkó, A., Kronsteiner, M., Glatzer, S., Vu, M., Lundman, J.A., Jonsson, J., Olof- sson, J., Sandgren, K., Lechner, W., Georg, D., et al.: A physics-informed, plug- and-play dose engine for gradient-based radiotherapy treatment planning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.18863 (2025)

work page arXiv 2025
[26]

In: OPT 2024: Opti- mization for Machine Learning

Thérien, B., Joseph, C.É., Knyazev, B., Oyallon, E., Rish, I., Belilovsky, E.:µlo: Compute-efficient meta-generalization of learned optimizers. In: OPT 2024: Opti- mization for Machine Learning

work page 2024
[27]

In: Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence

Wang, S., Sun, J., Xu, Z.: Hyperadam: A learnable task-adaptive adam for network training. In: Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence. vol. 33, pp. 5297–5304 (2019)

work page 2019
[28]

Wu, X., Yang, D., Sheng, Y., Ge, Y., Wu, Q.J., Wu, Q.: Illusion of conver- gence:Searchspacegeometryinradiotherapytreatmentplanoptimization.Medical Physics53(1), e70209 (2026)

work page 2026
[29]

Biomedical Physics & Engineering Express11(3), 035016 (2025)

Wu, X., Yang, D., Sheng, Y., Wu, Q.R.J., Wu, Q.: A machine learning toolkit assisted approach for imrt fluence map optimization: feasibility and advantages. Biomedical Physics & Engineering Express11(3), 035016 (2025)

work page 2025
[30]

Medical Physics52(11), e70132 (2025)

Yang, D., Wu, X., Xie, Y., Li, X., Wu, Q., Wu, Q.J., Sheng, Y.: Foresight plan- ning: Radiotherapy plan optimization via self-supervised model predictive control. Medical Physics52(11), e70132 (2025)

work page 2025
[31]

Advances in neural information processing systems37, 47455–47487 (2024)

Yin, T., Gharbi, M., Park, T., Zhang, R., Shechtman, E., Durand, F., Freeman, B.: Improved distribution matching distillation for fast image synthesis. Advances in neural information processing systems37, 47455–47487 (2024)

work page 2024
[32]

1–14 (2025)

Zhang,L.,Gui,Z.,Zhang,P.:Apertureshapegenerationbasedonadagrad.Nuclear Technology pp. 1–14 (2025)

work page 2025
[33]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.09376 (2025)

Zheng, B., Yang, T.: Revisiting diffusion models: From generative pre-training to one-step generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.09376 (2025)

work page arXiv 2025