MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2127922941 · doi:10.1109/42.981231

Automatic fusion of freehand endoscopic brain images to three-dimensional surfaces: creating stereoscopic panoramas

2002· article· en· W2127922941 on OpenAlexaff
Damini Dey, David G. Gobbi, Piotr J. Slomka, Kathleen Surry, T.M. Peters

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAugmented Reality Applications
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityLondon Health Sciences CentreRobarts Clinical Trials
FundersSmith and Nephew
KeywordsImaging phantomComputer visionEndoscopeFiducial markerArtificial intelligenceStereoscopyComputer scienceVisualizationContext (archaeology)Nuclear medicineRadiologyMedicineGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A major limitation of the use of endoscopes in minimally invasive surgery is the lack of relative context between the endoscope and its surroundings. The purpose of this work was to fuse images obtained from a tracked endoscope to surfaces derived from three-dimensional (3-D) preoperative magnetic resonance or computed tomography (CT) data, for assistance in surgical planning, training and guidance. We extracted polygonal surfaces from preoperative CT images of a standard brain phantom and digitized endoscopic video images from a tracked neuro-endoscope. The optical properties of the endoscope were characterized using a simple calibration procedure. Registration of the phantom (physical space) and CT images (preoperative image space) was accomplished using fiducial markers that could be identified both on the phantom and within the images. The endoscopic images were corrected for radial lens distortion and then mapped onto the extracted surfaces via a two-dimensional 2-D to 3-D mapping algorithm. The optical tracker has an accuracy of about 0.3 mm at its centroid, which allows the endoscope tip to be localized to within 1.0 mm. The mapping operation allows multiple endoscopic images to be "painted" onto the 3-D brain surfaces, as they are acquired, in the correct anatomical position. This allows panoramic and stereoscopic visualization, as well as navigation of the 3-D surface, painted with multiple endoscopic views, from arbitrary perspectives.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations81
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Medical ImagingSame topicAugmented Reality ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207