MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028168305 · doi:10.1177/153303460500400105

Geomatics for Precise 3D Breast Imaging

2005· article· en· W2028168305 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hilary Alto

Bibliographic record

VenueTechnology in Cancer Research & Treatment · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDigital Radiography and Breast Imaging
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMammographyImaging phantomBreast cancerMedicineMicrocalcificationArtificial intelligenceBreast imagingOrientation (vector space)PhotogrammetryNuclear medicineComputer scienceComputer visionRadiologyCancerMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canadian women have a one in nine chance of developing breast cancer during their lifetime. Mammography is the most common imaging technology used for breast cancer detection in its earliest stages through screening programs. Clusters of microcalcifications are primary indicators of breast cancer; the shape, size and number may be used to determine whether they are malignant or benign. However, overlapping images of calcifications on a mammogram hinder the classification of the shape and size of each calcification and a misdiagnosis may occur resulting in either an unnecessary biopsy being performed or a necessary biopsy not being performed. The introduction of 3D imaging techniques such as standard photogrammetry may increase the confidence of the radiologist when making his/her diagnosis. In this paper, traditional analytical photogrammetric techniques for the 3D mathematical reconstruction of microcalcifications are presented. The techniques are applied to a specially designed and constructed x-ray transparent Plexiglas phantom (control object). The phantom was embedded with 1.0 mm x-ray opaque lead pellets configured to represent overlapping microcalcifications. Control points on the phantom were determined by standard survey methods and hand measurements. X-ray films were obtained using a LORAD M-III mammography machine. The photogrammetric techniques of relative and absolute orientation were applied to the 2D mammographic films to analytically generate a 3D depth map with an overall accuracy of 0.6 mm. A Bundle Adjustment and the Direct Linear Transform were used to confirm the results.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.920
Threshold uncertainty score0.557

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.372 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTechnology in Cancer Research & TreatmentSame topicDigital Radiography and Breast ImagingFrench-language works237,207