MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975779047 · doi:10.1177/107155170401100209

Robot-Assisted Remote Telepresence Surgery

2004· article· en· W1975779047 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSurgical Innovation · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Simulation and Training
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTeleroboticsRobotic surgeryRobotMedicineSurgical proceduresSurgical robotVariety (cybernetics)Interface (matter)Human–computer interactionRoboticsMedical physicsSurgeryComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMobile robot

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A potential application of robotic surgical systems is to act as the hands and eyes of a surgeon operating from a considerable distance, enabling the surgeon to offer a variety of surgical services through gaining true telepresence by the interface of the telecommunication link and a surgical robotic system. The limited use of robot-assisted remote telepresence surgery to date has demonstrated not only that this is technologically feasible and safe but also that the patients are willing to accept its limitations when it is used in an environment where significant value from its use is realized. This chapter will discuss some of the lessons learned, the potential future applications, and the necessary next steps for its safe and widespread adoption.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.905
Threshold uncertainty score0.493

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.257 · 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