MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982883648 · doi:10.1117/12.628459

Surface reconstruction from structured-light images for radiation therapy

2005· article· en· W1982883648 on OpenAlexaff
Olesya Peshko, Christopher Kumar Anand, Tamás Terlaky

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptical measurement and interference techniques
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer visionStructured lightArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceSurface reconstructionOpticsLight intensityPhotometric stereoOffset (computer science)Surface (topology)MathematicsPhysicsImage (mathematics)Geometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To design and deliver proper radiation treatment for cancer patients, knowledge of the body's surface in the affected area is required. Currently, surface information is obtained by using a manually operated tracer. The drawbacks of this contact method include slow operation, and errors in repositioning the patient in an x-ray machine. Utilization of MRI or CT is also possible but expensive. We propose a non-contact, quick, inexpensive method to reconstruct the surface. In our non-contact method, a mask with transparent circular coloured spots and a black background, and an incoherent light source are used to create structured-light images. Colour coding is necessary to establish the correspondence between the projected and the observed patterns, which is essential for surface reconstruction. The deformed light pattern is photographed by an offset camera and analyzed. First, noise reduction is performed because images are noisy due to the low-light conditions and low sensitivity of an off-the-shelf camera. Then, pattern elements (light elliptical spots) are found in the image. We use an inverse polynomial to model the intensity of a light spot, which results in a non-convex, least-squares optimization problem. Next, spots are assigned to a grid according to their colours and location, and errors are corrected using the relative position of the spots. Finally, spatial coordinates of the surface points are computed and surface reconstruction is performed. The described algorithms are implemented as a MATLAB package, which converts the acquired images into a three-dimensional surface. The developed system is inexpensive, and it can easily be mounted on an x-ray machine. The software package can run on any standard PC.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.525
Threshold uncertainty score0.924

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.222 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicOptical measurement and interference techniquesFrench-language works237,207