Graphical Rendering of Localized Lumps for MIS Applications
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
Minimally invasive sugery (MIS) has increasingly been used in different surgical routines despite having significant shortcomings such as a lack of tactile feedback. Restoring this missing tactile information, particularly the information gained through tissue palpation, would be a significant enhancement to MIS capabilities. Tissue palpation is particularly important and commonly used in locating embedded lumps. The present study is inspired by this major limitation of the MIS procedure and is aimed at developing a system to reconstruct the lost palpation capability of surgeons in an effective way. By collecting necessary information on the size and location of hidden features using MIS graspers equipped with tactile sensors, the information can be processed and graphically rendered to the surgeon. Therefore, using the proposed system, surgeons can identify the presence or absence, location, and approximate size of hidden lumps simply by grasping the target organ with a smart endoscopic grasper. The results of the conducted experiments on the prototyped MIS graspers represented by graphical images are compared with those of the finite element models.
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 | 0.001 | 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