A tool for intraoperative visualization of registration results
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Validation of image registration algorithms is frequently accomplished by the visual inspection of the resulting linear or deformable transformation due to the lack of ground truth information. Visualization of transformations produced by image registration algorithms during image-guided interventions allows for a clinician to evaluate the accuracy of the result transformation. Software packages that perform the visualization of transformations exist, but are not part of a clinically usable software application. We present a tool that visualizes both linear and deformable transformations and is integrated in an open-source software application framework suited for intraoperative use and general evaluation of registration algorithms. METHODS: A choice of six different modes are available for visualization of a transform. Glyph visualization mode uses oriented and scaled glyphs, such as arrows, to represent the displacement field in 3D whereas glyph slice visualization mode creates arrows that can be seen as a 2D vector field. Grid visualization mode creates deformed grids shown in 3D whereas grid slice visualization mode creates a series of 2D grids. Block visualization mode creates a deformed bounding box of the warped volume. Finally, contour visualization mode creates isosurfaces and isolines that visualize the magnitude of displacement across a volume. The application 3D Slicer was chosen as the platform for the transform visualizer tool. 3D Slicer is a comprehensive open-source application framework developed for medical image computing and used for intra-operative registration. RESULTS: The transform visualizer tool fulfilled the requirements for quick evaluation of intraoperative image registrations. Visualizations were generated in 3D Slicer with little computation time on realistic datasets. It is freely available as an extension for 3D Slicer. CONCLUSION: A tool for the visualization of displacement fields was created and integrated into 3D Slicer, facilitating the validation of image registration algorithms within a comprehensive application framework suited for intraoperative use.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.039 | 0.012 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".