Real-Time Estimation of FLE Statistics for 3-D Tracking With Point-Based Registration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Target registration error (TRE) has become a widely accepted error metric in point-based registration since the error metric was introduced in the 1990s. It is particularly prominent in image-guided surgery (IGS) applications where point-based registration is used in both image registration and optical tracking. In point-based registration, the TRE is a function of the fiducial marker geometry, location of the target and the fiducial localizer error (FLE). While the first two items are easily obtained, the FLE is usually estimated using an a priori technique and applied without any knowledge of real-time information. However, if the FLE can be estimated in real-time, particularly as it pertains to optical tracking, then the TRE can be estimated more robustly. In this paper, a method is presented where the FLE statistics are estimated from the latest measurement of the fiducial registration error (FRE) statistics. The solution is obtained by solving a linear system of equations of the form Ax=b for each marker at each time frame where x are the six independent FLE covariance parameters and b are the six independent estimated FRE covariance parameters. The A matrix is only a function of the tool geometry and hence the inverse of the matrix can be computed a priori and used at each instant in which the FLE estimation is required, hence minimizing the level of computation at each frame. When using a good estimate of the FRE statistics, Monte Carlo simulations demonstrate that the root mean square of the FLE can be computed within a range of 70-90 microm. Robust estimation of the TRE for an optically tracked tool, using a good estimate of the FLE, will provide two enhancements in IGS. First, better patient to image registration will be obtained by using the TRE of the optical tool as a weighting factor of point-based registration used to map the patient to image space. Second, the directionality of the TRE can be relayed back to the surgeon giving the surgeon the option of changing their strategy in order to improve the overall system accuracy and, in turn, the quality of procedure.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".