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
Contemporary imaging modalities can now provide the surgeon with high quality three- and four-dimensional images depicting not only normal anatomy and pathology, but also vascularity and function. A key component of image-guided surgery (IGS) is the ability to register multi-modal pre-operative images to each other and to the patient. The other important component of IGS is the ability to track instruments in real time during the procedure and to display them as part of a realistic model of the operative volume. Stereoscopic, virtual- and augmented-reality techniques have been implemented to enhance the visualization and guidance process. For the most part, IGS relies on the assumption that the pre-operatively acquired images used to guide the surgery accurately represent the morphology of the tissue during the procedure. This assumption may not necessarily be valid, and so intra-operative real-time imaging using interventional MRI, ultrasound, video and electrophysiological recordings are often employed to ameliorate this situation. Although IGS is now in extensive routine clinical use in neurosurgery and is gaining ground in other surgical disciplines, there remain many drawbacks that must be overcome before it can be employed in more general minimally-invasive procedures. This review overviews the roots of IGS in neurosurgery, provides examples of its use outside the brain, discusses the infrastructure required for successful implementation of IGS approaches and outlines the challenges that must be overcome for IGS to advance further.
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) | 0.002 | 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