MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000031242 · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/46/8/403

A 3D MRI sequence for computer assisted surgery of the lumbar spine

2001· article· en· W2000031242 on OpenAlexaff
Caroline L. Hoad, Anne L. Martel, R. W. Kerslake, MP Grevitt

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMedical Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersAO Foundation
KeywordsSegmentationComputer scienceLumbar spineMagnetic resonance imagingArtificial intelligenceData setComputer visionSequence (biology)RadiologyNuclear medicineBiomedical engineeringMedicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this research was to develop a magnetic resonance (MR) sequence capable of producing images suitable for use with computer assisted surgery (CAS) of the lumbar spine. These images needed good tissue contrast between bone and soft tissue to allow for image segmentation and generation of a 3D-surface model of the bone for surface registration. A 3D double echo fast gradient echo sequence was designed. Images were filtered for noise and non-uniformity and combined into a single data set. Registration experiments were carried out to directly compare segmentation of MR and computed tomography (CT) images using a physical model of a spine. These experiments showed the MR data produced adequate surface registration in 90% of the experiments compared to 100% with CT data. The MR images acquired using the sequence and processing described in this article are suitable to be used with CAS of the spine.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.193
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.166 · 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 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

Citations16
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and BiologySame topicMedical Imaging and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207