MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148296512 · doi:10.1109/tmi.2009.2026412

Prostate Brachytherapy Seed Reconstruction With Gaussian Blurring and Optimal Coverage Cost

2009· article· en· W2148296512 on OpenAlexaff
Junghoon Lee, Xiaofeng Liu, Abhishek Jain, D. Song, Everette C. Burdette, Jerry L. Prince, Gábor Fichtinger

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsImaging phantomProstate brachytherapyTomosynthesisBrachytherapyArtificial intelligenceIterative reconstructionComputer visionComputer scienceMathematicsFluoroscopyProjection (relational algebra)DosimetryNuclear medicineAlgorithmMedicineMammographyRadiation therapyRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intraoperative dosimetry in prostate brachytherapy requires localization of the implanted radioactive seeds. A tomosynthesis-based seed reconstruction method is proposed. A three-dimensional volume is reconstructed from Gaussian-blurred projection images and candidate seed locations are computed from the reconstructed volume. A false positive seed removal process, formulated as an optimal coverage problem, iteratively removes "ghost" seeds that are created by tomosynthesis reconstruction. In an effort to minimize pose errors that are common in conventional C-arms, initial pose parameter estimates are iteratively corrected by using the detected candidate seeds as fiducials, which automatically "focuses" the collected images and improves successive reconstructed volumes. Simulation results imply that the implanted seed locations can be estimated with a detection rate of > or = 97.9% and > or = 99.3% from three and four images, respectively, when the C-arm is calibrated and the pose of the C-arm is known. The algorithm was also validated on phantom data sets successfully localizing the implanted seeds from four or five images. In a Phase-1 clinical trial, we were able to localize the implanted seeds from five intraoperative fluoroscopy images with 98.8% (STD=1.6) overall detection rate.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.620

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations15
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Medical ImagingSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207