MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073211476 · doi:10.1109/iembs.2011.6091213

GPU implementation of a deformable 3D image registration algorithm

2011· article· en· W2073211476 on OpenAlexaff
Hossein Mousazadeh, Bahram Marami, Shahin Sirouspour, Alexandru Patriciu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMedical Image Segmentation Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCUDAImage registrationGraphics processing unitSpeedupInterpolation (computer graphics)Computer visionImaging phantomImage resolutionGraphicsAlgorithmDisplacement (psychology)Medical imagingImage processingArtificial intelligenceImage (mathematics)Computer graphics (images)Parallel computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a parallel implementation of a new deformable image registration algorithm using the Computer Unified Device Architecture (CUDA). The algorithm co-registers preoperative and intraoperative 3-dimensional magnetic resonance (MR) images of a deforming organ. It employs a linear elastic dynamic finite-element model of the deformation and distance measures such as mutual information and sum of squared differences to align volumetric image data sets. Computationally intensive elements of the method such as interpolation, displacement and force calculation are significantly accelerated using a Graphics Processing Unit (GPU). The result of experiments carried out with a realistic breast phantom tissue shows a 37 fold speedup for the GPU-based implementation compared with an optimized CPU-based implementation in high resolution MR image registration. The GPU implementation is capable of registering 512 × 512 × 136 image sets in just over 2 seconds, making it suitable for clinical applications requiring fast and accurate processing of medical images.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.971
Threshold uncertainty score0.729

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations11
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMedical Image Segmentation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207