Creating and Animating Subject‐Specific Anatomical Models
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
Abstract Creating and animating subject‐specific anatomical models is traditionally a difficult process involving medical image segmentation, geometric corrections and the manual definition of kinematic parameters. In this paper, we introduce a novel template morphing algorithm that facilitates three‐dimensional modelling and parameterization of skeletons. Target data can be either medical images or surfaces of the whole skeleton. We incorporate prior knowledge about bone shape, the feasible skeleton pose and the morphological variability in the population. This allows for noise reduction, bone separation and the transfer, from the template, of anatomical and kinematical information not present in the input data. Our approach treats both local and global deformations in successive regularization steps: smooth elastic deformations are represented by an as‐rigid‐as‐possible displacement field between the reference and current configuration of the template, whereas global and discontinuous displacements are estimated through a projection onto a statistical shape model and a new joint pose optimization scheme with joint limits.
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 | 0.000 | 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