Remote palpation to localize tumors in robot-assisted minimally invasive approach
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
This paper presents a new tactile-force integrated method to localize tumors minimally invasively using robotic assistance. This method relies on using a capacitive sensor at the tip of a Tactile Sensing Instrument (TSI) which can be inserted into a patient's body in a minimally invasive manner. In this work, the operator palpates tissue containing tumors in a minimally invasive surgical (MIS) training box, representing the patient's body, through a master-slave teleoperation system which consists of a 7 degrees-of-freedom (DOF) haptic interface, used as the master, and a Mitsubishi PA10-7C robot as the slave. Using the proposed method, the operator would be able to palpate the tissue consistently, observe the pressure distribution over the tissue by a color contour map on a screen and feel the tumor on his/her fingers through a grasping mechanism of the haptic interface as a result of higher stiffness of the tumor. The tissue used for the experiments was ex vivo bovine lung and seven participants were asked to locate artificial tumors embedded in the lungs. The results show an accuracy of 93% in tumor localization using the proposed method while the average force applied to the tissue was 3.42N and the force never exceeded 6N.
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) | 0.000 | 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