MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145677202 · doi:10.1109/titb.2008.921043

A Robust 3-D IVUS Transducer Tracking Using Single-Plane Cineangiography

2008· article· en· W2145677202 on OpenAlexaff
Melissa Jourdain, Jean Meunier, Jean Séqueira, Jean-Marc Boï, Jean‐Claude Tardif

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Information Technology in Biomedicine · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoronary Interventions and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsMontreal Heart InstituteUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPullbackTransducerBiplaneComputer visionComputer scienceIntravascular ultrasoundCineangiographyTracking (education)Artificial intelligenceTrajectoryPosition (finance)Plane (geometry)StereoscopyAcousticsMathematicsPhysicsRadiologyGeometryMedicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During an intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) intervention, a catheter with an ultrasound transducer is introduced in the body through a blood vessel, and then, pulled back to image a sequence of vessel cross sections. Unfortunately, there is no 3-D information about the position and orientation of these cross-section planes, which makes them less informative. To position the IVUS images in space, some researchers have proposed complex stereoscopic procedures relying on biplane angiography to get two X-ray image sequences of the IVUS transducer trajectory along the catheter. To simplify this procedure, we and others have elaborated algorithms to recover the transducer 3-D trajectory with only a single view X-ray image sequence. In this paper, we present an improved method that provides both automated 2-D and 3-D transducer tracking based on pullback speed as a priori information. The proposed algorithm is robust to erratic pullback speed and is more accurate than the previous single-plane 3-D tracking methods.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.697
Threshold uncertainty score0.866

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations11
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Information Technology in BiomedicineSame topicCoronary Interventions and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207