MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Illustrative Hybrid Visualization and Exploration of Anatomical and Functional Brain Data

2008· article· en· W2136496323 on OpenAlexaff
Werner Jainek, Silvia Born, Dirk Bartz, Wolfgang Straßer, J. Fischer

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Graphics Forum · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisualizationComputer scienceRendering (computer graphics)Volume renderingCLARITYData visualizationHuman–computer interactionArtificial intelligenceComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Common practice in brain research and brain surgery involves the multi‐modal acquisition of brain anatomy and brain activation data. These highly complex three‐dimensional data have to be displayed simultaneously in order to convey spatial relationships. Unique challenges in information and interaction design have to be solved in order to keep the visualization sufficiently complete and uncluttered at the same time. The visualization method presented in this paper addresses these issues by using a hybrid combination of polygonal rendering of brain structures and direct volume rendering of activation data. Advanced rendering techniques including illustrative display styles and ambient occlusion calculations enhance the clarity of the visual output. The presented rendering pipeline produces real‐time frame rates and offers a high degree of configurability. Newly designed interaction and measurement tools are provided, which enable the user to explore the data at large, but also to inspect specific features closely. We demonstrate the system in the context of a cognitive neurosciences dataset. An initial informal evaluation shows that our visualization method is deemed useful for clinical research.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations28
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer Graphics ForumSame topicComputer Graphics and Visualization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207