MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Development of a 4‐dimensional model of the human heart using cardiac CT data

2009· article· en· W208408552 on OpenAlexaff
Harold Yim, Bob Kiaii

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAnatomy and Medical Technology
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceHeartbeatSegmentationHuman heartArtificial intelligenceVisualizationZoomVoxelStereoscopyComputer visionHuman anatomyComputer graphics (images)AnatomyMedicineCardiologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new and interactive model for presenting human anatomy may allow students, instructors, and clinicians to better understand and integrate knowledge of the body. The aim is to create an anatomically correct three‐dimensional (3‐D) model of a human heart that will be able to rhythmically contract with time, resulting in a four‐dimensional (4‐D) heart model. ECG‐gated cardiac computed tomography (CCT) scans taken at ten time phases (5%‐95%, at 10% intervals) were processed by 3‐D visualization and modeling software (AMIRA). Using manual and automatic segmentation techniques, voxels with gray scale values representing different parts of the heart anatomy were selected and compiled to create the model. A model was constructed for each heartbeat phase, and all phase models were consolidated into one dynamic moving model. The resulting stereoscopic 4‐D model will retain the structure of the original anatomy. An effort will be made to detect any pathological anomalies in the patient using the model. It will feature interactive and explorative capability, eg. zooming in/out, addition and removal of different areas of the heart anatomy, and alteration of model opacity for better viewing of inner compartments. Grant Funding Source Internal

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.334
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.223 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicAnatomy and Medical TechnologyFrench-language works237,207