3D shape visualization of curved needles in tissue from 2D ultrasound images using RANSAC
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper introduces an automatic method to visualize 3D needle shapes for reliable assessment of needle placement during needle insertion procedures. Based on partial observations of the needle within a small sample of 2D transverse ultrasound images, the 3D shape of the entire needle is reconstructed. An intensity thresholding technique is used to identify points representing possible needle locations within each 2D ultrasound image. Then, a Random Sample and Consensus (RANSAC) algorithm is used to filter out false positives and fit the remaining points to a polynomial model. To test this method, a set of 21 transverse ultrasound images of a brachytherapy needle embedded within a transparent tissue phantom are obtained and used to reconstruct the needle shape. Results are validated using camera images which capture the true needle shape. For this experimental data, obtaining at least three images from an insertion depth of 50 mm or greater allows the entire needle shape to be calculated with an average error of 0.5 mm with respect to the measured needle curve obtained from the camera image. Future work and application to robotics is also discussed.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it