Recovering 3D Shape with Absolute Size from Endoscope Images Using RBF Neural Network
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Medical diagnosis judges the status of polyp from the size and the 3D shape of the polyp from its medical endoscope image. However the medical doctor judges the status empirically from the endoscope image and more accurate 3D shape recovery from its 2D image has been demanded to support this judgment. As a method to recover 3D shape with high speed, VBW (Vogel-Breuß-Weickert) model is proposed to recover 3D shape under the condition of point light source illumination and perspective projection. However, VBW model recovers the relative shape but there is a problem that the shape cannot be recovered with the exact size. Here, shape modification is introduced to recover the exact shape with modification from that with VBW model. RBF-NN is introduced for the mapping between input and output. Input is given as the output of gradient parameters of VBW model for the generated sphere. Output is given as the true gradient parameters of true values of the generated sphere. Learning mapping with NN can modify the gradient and the depth can be recovered according to the modified gradient parameters. Performance of the proposed approach is confirmed via computer simulation and real experiment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".