A systematic approach to feature tracking of lumbar spine vertebrae from fluoroscopic images using complex-valued wavelets
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
This paper presents a systematic approach to lumbar spine vertebrae tracking in fluoroscopic images using complex-valued wavelets. The proposed algorithm is designed specifically based on a set of performance criteria associated with the detection and tracking of feature points in lumbar spine vertebrae from fluoroscopic images. The algorithm handles contrast and illumination non-homogeneities and noise in fluoroscopic images through the use of local phase information obtained using complex-valued wavelets. The algorithm is capable of tracking feature points that undergo various geometric deformations caused during the fluoroscopic imaging process by defining a descriptor that is invariant to scale and rotation and robust to affine, projective and mild pin-cushion distortions. The algorithm has been tested using dynamic sagittal fluoroscopic videos of the lumbar-sacral region and testing results indicate that the algorithm achieves good tracking performance of lumbar spine vertebrae in fluoroscopic images that exhibit contrast and illumination non-homogeneities as well as noise, with mean root mean square error of less than 0.40 mm under in all test sequences.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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