Statistical comparison between a real-time model and a FEM counterpart for visualization of breast phantom deformation during palpation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In developing a Virtual Reality simulation for learning breast palpation, one of critical aspects is real-time visualization of breast phantom deformation during palpation. Available models are either offline ones using Finite Element Method (FEM) analysis with considering some material parameters of deformable objects; or real-time ones with difficulties of balancing between this consideration and realistic visualization. For visual perception of breast phantom deformation, we used a real-time model with an inside pressure to keep the volume of the breast phantom constant. On a meshed breast phantom, we compared the displacements of vertices governed by the real-time model with those governed by its FEM counterpart for four different distributions of contact force. To satisfy visual perception of breast phantom deformation, we examined the comparison by utilizing the statistical methods of ANOVA and Bland and Altman agreement. The results revealed that the displacements of vertices governed by the real-time model are in agreement with those by its FEM counterpart for each distribution of contact force. This observation indicates the potential of our real-time model for visualizing breast phantom deformation during palpation.
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".