MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975257837 · doi:10.1118/1.3447721

Validation of 3D reconstructions of a mimicked femoral artery with an ultrasound imaging robotic system

2010· article· en· W1975257837 on OpenAlexafffund
Marie‐Ange Janvier, Gilles Soulez, Louise Allard, Guy Cloutier

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound Imaging and Elastography
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsImaging phantomScannerCalibrationIterative reconstructionUltrasoundMedicineBiomedical engineeringImage resolutionStenosisArtificial intelligenceRadiologyComputer visionComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The degree of stenosis is the most important criterion to assess peripheral arterial disease manifested by atherosclerosis mainly in lower limb arteries. Ultrasound (U.S.) imaging offers low-cost, safe, and convenient options to evaluate this disease, but most U.S. freehand approaches cannot optimally locate stenoses and map lower limb arterial geometries. A 3D-U.S. imaging robotic system that can control and standardize image acquisition by scanning typically encountered diseased arterial lower limb segments is presented and validated with phantoms. METHODS: A Z-phantom calibration procedure was used to characterize spatial transformation of the U.S. probe image plane for different clinical image acquisition settings. Moreover, the accuracy of the calibration transform to reconstruct a lower-limb-mimicking vessel geometry was evaluated with a vascular phantom. RESULTS: A 3D calibration precision of 0.47 +/- 0.27 mm was achieved. Reconstruction errors were less than 1.74 +/- 0.08 mm in all 3D vessel representations and the cross-sectional areas of each image section were close to those of gold standard phantom measures. The best reconstruction accuracy (smallest error) was 0.40 +/- 0.03 mm. CONCLUSION: Altogether, these results demonstrate the potential of the robotic scanner to adequately represent lower limb vessels for the clinical evaluation of stenoses.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations15
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicUltrasound Imaging and ElastographyFrench-language works237,207