MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998440626 · doi:10.1080/10255840500521786

3D reconstruction of the pelvis from bi-planar radiography

2006· article· en· W1998440626 on OpenAlexaff
David Mitton, Sylvain Deschênes, S. Laporte, B. Godbout, Samuel Bertrand, Jacques A. de Guise, Wafa Skalli

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Methods in Biomechanics & Biomedical Engineering · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Shape Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPelvisPlanarRadiographyComputer scienceComputationComputer vision3D reconstructionArtificial intelligenceRadiologyMedicineNuclear medicineMedical physicsComputer graphics (images)Algorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

3D personalized models are more and more requested for clinical and biomechanical studies. Techniques based on bi-planar X-rays present the advantage of a low radiation dose for the patient. However, up to now, such techniques have shown limited accuracy in the case of pelvis reconstruction. This study proposes and validates a method providing accurate 3D personalized model of the pelvis from bi-planar X-rays. The algorithm is based on the fast computation of an initial solution followed by local deformations based on 2D anatomical points and contours that are digitized in both radiographs. Results were close to CT-scan reconstructions (mean difference 1.6 mm and differences under 4.3 mm for 95% of the points). Moreover, 3D morphometry of the pelvis could be obtained with an accuracy of 5%. This technique provides 3D patient specific model with a low radiation dose.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations73
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer Methods in Biomechanics & Biomedical EngineeringSame topic3D Shape Modeling and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207