Automatic labeling and segmentation of vertebrae in CT images
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Labeling and segmentation of the spinal column from CT images is a pre-processing step for a range of image- guided interventions. State-of-the art techniques have focused either on image feature extraction or template matching for labeling of the vertebrae followed by segmentation of each vertebra. Recently, statistical multi- object models have been introduced to extract common statistical characteristics among several anatomies. In particular, we have created models for segmentation of the lumbar spine which are robust, accurate, and computationally tractable. In this paper, we reconstruct a statistical multi-vertebrae pose+shape model and utilize it in a novel framework for labeling and segmentation of the vertebra in a CT image. We validate our technique in terms of accuracy of the labeling and segmentation of CT images acquired from 56 subjects. The method correctly labels all vertebrae in 70% of patients and is only one level off for the remaining 30%. The mean distance error achieved for the segmentation is 2.1 +/- 0.7 mm.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it