MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2155097422 · doi:10.1109/ccece.1999.804936

Surface modeling methods: correlation vs. unique feature extraction

2003· article· en· W2155097422 on OpenAlexaff
T.G. Cowley, Dan Hill, N.G. Durdle, A. E. Peterson, V.J. Raso

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMedical Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsCapital District Health AuthorityUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer visionComputer scienceGrayscaleCurvatureScoliosisRotation (mathematics)TrunkFeature (linguistics)Feature extractionPixelSurface (topology)Computer graphics (images)MathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Scoliosis is a complex deformity of the trunk that induces curvature of the spine and axial rotation of individual vertebrae. Valid 3D models of the trunk surface would enable physicians to evaluate natural history and the effects of treatment for scoliosis. The authors propose a stereo vision system which works as follows. First a slide consisting of light and dark lines is projected onto the back. This slide is coded with white, black, and grey lines. The code was chosen to make correlation results easiest to use. The next step is for the operator to verify that the subject is positioned correctly. This means that the slide is covering as much of their back as possible and that the horizontal reference line is near the middle of their back. Two images are captured of the back at 640 by 480 resolution in 8 bit greyscale. The cameras that capture these images are separated by roughly 40 degrees. This is sufficient for the model accuracy that we desire. After the images are transferred to the main computer, the operator has to specify which section of the image is to be analyzed. The raw images are then analyzed by the model building system.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.684
Threshold uncertainty score0.262

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMedical Imaging and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207