An estimation/correction algorithm for detecting bone edges in CT images
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The normal direction of the bone contour in computed tomography (CT) images provides important anatomical information and can guide segmentation algorithms. Since various bones in CT images have different sizes, and the intensity values of bone pixels are generally nonuniform and noisy, estimation of the normal direction using a single scale is not reliable. We propose a multiscale approach to estimate the normal direction of bone edges. The reliability of the estimation is calculated from the estimated results and, after re-scaling, the reliability is used to further correct the normal direction. The optimal scale at each point is obtained while estimating the normal direction; this scale is then used in a simple edge detector. Our experimental results have shown that use of this estimated/corrected normal direction improves the segmentation quality by decreasing the number of unexpected edges and discontinuities (gaps) of real contours. The corrected normal direction could also be used in postprocessing to delete false edges. Our segmentation algorithm is automatic, and its performance is evaluated on CT images of the human pelvis, leg, and wrist.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it