MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971263111 · doi:10.1118/1.2745235

A frequency‐based approach to locate common structure for 2D‐3D intensity‐based registration of setup images in prostate radiotherapy

2007· article· en· W1971263111 on OpenAlexaff
Reshma Munbodh, Zhe Chen, David A. Jaffray, D Moseley, Jonathan Knisely, James S. Duncan

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health Network
FundersNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering
KeywordsImage registrationImaging phantomMutual informationStandard deviationArtificial intelligenceComputer visionImage-guided radiation therapyComputed radiographyRadiographyComputer scienceRadiation treatment planningCone beam computed tomographyNuclear medicineMedical imagingMedicineRadiation therapyRadiologyMathematicsComputed tomographyImage (mathematics)Image quality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In many radiotherapy clinics, geometric uncertainties in the delivery of 3D conformal radiation therapy and intensity modulated radiation therapy of the prostate are reduced by aligning the patient's bony anatomy in the planning 3D CT to corresponding bony anatomy in 2D portal images acquired before every treatment fraction. In this paper, we seek to determine if there is a frequency band within the portal images and the digitally reconstructed radiographs (DRRs) of the planning CT in which bony anatomy predominates over non-bony anatomy such that portal images and DRRs can be suitably filtered to achieve high registration accuracy in an automated 2D-3D single portal intensity-based registration framework. Two similarity measures, mutual information and the Pearson correlation coefficient were tested on carefully collected gold-standard data consisting of a kilovoltage cone-beam CT (CBCT) and megavoltage portal images in the anterior-posterior (AP) view of an anthropomorphic phantom acquired under clinical conditions at known poses, and on patient data. It was found that filtering the portal images and DRRs during the registration considerably improved registration performance. Without filtering, the registration did not always converge while with filtering it always converged to an accurate solution. For the pose-determination experiments conducted on the anthropomorphic phantom with the correlation coefficient, the mean (and standard deviation) of the absolute errors in recovering each of the six transformation parameters were Theta(x):0.18(0.19) degrees, Theta(y):0.04(0.04) degrees, Theta(z):0.04(0.02) degrees, t(x):0.14(0.15) mm, t(y):0.09(0.05) mm, and t(z):0.49(0.40) mm. The mutual information-based registration with filtered images also resulted in similarly small errors. For the patient data, visual inspection of the superimposed registered images showed that they were correctly aligned in all instances. The results presented in this paper suggest that robust and accurate registration can be achieved with intensity-based methods by focusing on rigid bony structures in the images while diminishing the influence of artifacts with similar frequencies as soft tissue.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations14
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207