Researcher profile

Takeshi Kai

Takeshi Kai contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 13 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
2works
0followers
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2025arXiv

Evaluation of the uncertainty in calculating nanodosimetric quantities due to the use of different interaction cross sections in Monte Carlo track structure codes

This study evaluates the uncertainty in nanodosimetric calculations caused by variations in interaction cross sections within Monte Carlo Track Structure (MCTS) simulation codes. Nanodosimetry relies on accurately simulating particle interactions at the molecular scale. Different MCTS codes employ distinct physical models and datasets for electron interactions in liquid water, a surrogate for biological tissues. The paper focuses on the Ionization Cluster Size Distribution (ICSD) generated by electrons of varying energies in nanometric volumes. Seven MCTS codes were tested using their native cross sections and a common dataset derived from averaging data used in the participating codes. The results reveal significant discrepancies among the codes in ICSDs and derived biologically relevant nanodosimetric quantities such as mean ionization numbers (M1) and probabilities of obtaining two or more ionizations (F2). The largest variations were observed for low-energy electrons, where the contribution from interaction cross sections dominates the overall uncertainties. For instance, M1 values for ICSDs of electron of 20 eV can differ by around 45 % (RSD) and 34 % (RSD) was found for F2 values of ICSDs of electrons of 50 eV. Using common cross sections substantially reduced the discrepancies, suggesting that cross section datasets are the primary source of variability. Finally, estimates of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) damage using the PARTRAC code highlight tht cross section variations have a non-negligible impact simulated biological outcomes, particularly for double-strand breaks (DSBs) Indeed, despite the fact that many other parameters in the simulation that can greatly differ from one code to another, the different interaction cross-sections studied in this work can lead to differences in the number of DSBs calculated with the PARTRAC code of up to 15%.

preprint2022arXiv

Cartesian Tree Subsequence Matching

Park et al. [TCS 2020] observed that the similarity between two (numerical) strings can be captured by the Cartesian trees: The Cartesian tree of a string is a binary tree recursively constructed by picking up the smallest value of the string as the root of the tree. Two strings of equal length are said to Cartesian-tree match if their Cartesian trees are isomorphic. Park et al. [TCS 2020] introduced the following Cartesian tree substring matching (CTMStr) problem: Given a text string $T$ of length $n$ and a pattern string of length $m$, find every consecutive substring $S = T[i..j]$ of a text string $T$ such that $S$ and $P$ Cartesian-tree match. They showed how to solve this problem in $\tilde{O}(n+m)$ time. In this paper, we introduce the Cartesian tree subsequence matching (CTMSeq) problem, that asks to find every minimal substring $S = T[i..j]$ of $T$ such that $S$ contains a subsequence $S'$ which Cartesian-tree matches $P$. We prove that the CTMSeq problem can be solved efficiently, in $O(m n p(n))$ time, where $p(n)$ denotes the update/query time for dynamic predecessor queries. By using a suitable dynamic predecessor data structure, we obtain $O(mn \log \log n)$-time and $O(n \log m)$-space solution for CTMSeq. This contrasts CTMSeq with closely related order-preserving subsequence matching (OPMSeq) which was shown to be NP-hard by Bose et al. [IPL 1998].