MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1540012330 · doi:10.1117/12.710472

3D surface parameterization using manifold learning for medial shape representation

2007· article· en· W1540012330 on OpenAlexaff
Aaron D. Ward, Ghassan Hamarneh

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMedical Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedial axisSkeletonizationTopological skeletonPolygon meshSurface (topology)Artificial intelligenceGeometryRepresentation (politics)SegmentationManifold (fluid mechanics)Nonlinear dimensionality reductionMathematicsComputer scienceComputer visionDimensionality reductionActive shape model

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The choice of 3D shape representation for anatomical structures determines the effectiveness with which segmentation, visualization, deformation, and shape statistics are performed. Medial axis-based shape representations have attracted considerable attention due to their inherent ability to encode information about the natural geometry of parts of the anatomy. In this paper, we propose a novel approach, based on nonlinear manifold learning, to the parameterization of medial sheets and object surfaces based on the results of skeletonization. For each single-sheet figure in an anatomical structure, we skeletonize the figure, and classify its surface points according to whether they lie on the upper or lower surface, based on their relationship to the skeleton points. We then perform nonlinear dimensionality reduction on the skeleton, upper, and lower surface points, to find the intrinsic 2D coordinate system of each. We then center a planar mesh over each of the low-dimensional representations of the points, and map the meshes back to 3D using the mappings obtained by manifold learning. Correspondence between mesh vertices, established in their intrinsic 2D coordinate spaces, is used in order to compute the thickness vectors emanating from the medial sheet. We show results of our algorithm on real brain and musculoskeletal structures extracted from MRI, as well as an artificial multi-sheet example. The main advantages to this method are its relative simplicity and noniterative nature, and its ability to correctly compute nonintersecting thickness vectors for a medial sheet regardless of both the amount of coincident bending and thickness in the object, and of the incidence of local concavities and convexities in the object's surface.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.838
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.239 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicMedical Imaging and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207