MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2031550407 · doi:10.1109/iembs.2010.5627135

A new representation of intensity atlas for GPU-accelerated instance generation

2010· article· en· W2031550407 on OpenAlexaff
Ren Hui Gong, James Stewart, Purang Abolmaesumi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtlas (anatomy)Computer scienceSpline (mechanical)Graphics processing unitVoxelComputationGraphicsComputational scienceB-splineComputer graphics (images)Artificial intelligenceGeneral-purpose computing on graphics processing unitsAlgorithmComputer visionParallel computingMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fast instance generation is a key requirement in atlas-based registration and other problems that need a large number of atlas instances. This paper describes a new method to represent and construct intensity atlases. Both geometry and intensity information are represented using B-spline deformation lattices; intensities are approximated using the multi-level B-spline approximation algorithm during model creation and the parallel computation capability of modern graphics processing units is used to accelerate the process of instance generation. Experiments with distal radius CTs show that, with a coefficients-to-voxels ratio of 0.16, intensities can be approximated up to an average accuracy of 2 ± 17 grey-levels (out of 3072 total grey-levels), and instances of resolution 256×256×200 can be produced in a rate of 25 instances per second with a GeForce GTX 285 video card, which is about 500 times performance improvement over the traditional method that uses plain CPU.

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)0.003
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.280 · 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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval TechniquesFrench-language works237,207