MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041230194 · doi:10.1145/2407336.2407384

Exploration of fused multi-volume images using user-defined binary masks

2012· article· en· W2041230194 on OpenAlexaff
Ryan T. Armstrong, Roy Eagleson, Sandrine de Ribaupierre

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceVolume renderingVisualizationRendering (computer graphics)Context (archaeology)ModalitiesModality (human–computer interaction)Data visualizationVolume (thermodynamics)Plot (graphics)Artificial intelligenceComputer visionData miningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Acquisition and fusion of multiple imaging modalities is becoming an increasingly desired clinical practice. This is particularly the case in radiation therapy, where dosage must be determined using electron density calculations from CT images, which lack the contrast to resolve soft-tissue structures. This often necessitates the fusion of corresponding MRI images in order to plot radiation trajectories safely around critical tissues. Simultaneous visualization of multiple volumes using direct volume rendering (DVR) techniques offers a number of advantages over traditional visualization methods. Specifically, fused visualization enhances the relational aspects of volumes, providing improved context [cite the first one]. However, there are many challenges involved in implementing DVR using fused data sets. The primary challenge is determining how images overlap to provide meaningful information. Additionally, there is increased computational complexity beyond standard DVR techniques, threatening real-time applications of fused DVR. These difficulties are evident to users of such systems as they must manage complex user interfaces and poor application performance. In this work, we introduce a user-centric multi-volume DVR technique which addresses issues of performance and ease of use. Through an intuitive interface, users are able to spatially define regions of interest, determining the relative contributions of each modality in the output rendering.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.909
Threshold uncertainty score0.402

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicComputer Graphics and Visualization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207