Lumbar Spine Segmentation Using a Statistical Multi-Vertebrae Anatomical Shape+Pose Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Segmentation of the spinal column from computed tomography (CT) images is a preprocessing step for a range of image-guided interventions. One intervention that would benefit from accurate segmentation is spinal needle injection. Previous spinal segmentation techniques have primarily focused on identification and separate segmentation of each vertebra. Recently, statistical multi-object shape models have been introduced to extract common statistical characteristics between several anatomies. These models can be used for segmentation purposes because they are robust, accurate, and computationally tractable. In this paper, we develop a statistical multi-vertebrae shape+pose model and propose a novel registration-based technique to segment the CT images of spine. The multi-vertebrae statistical model captures the variations in shape and pose simultaneously, which reduces the number of registration parameters. We validate our technique in terms of accuracy and robustness of multi-vertebrae segmentation of CT images acquired from lumbar vertebrae of 32 subjects. The mean error of the proposed technique is below 2 mm, which is sufficient for many spinal needle injection procedures, such as facet joint injections.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".