Dynamic 3-D Virtual Fixtures for Minimally Invasive Beating Heart Procedures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two-dimensional or 3-D visual guidance is often used for minimally invasive cardiac surgery and diagnosis. This visual guidance suffers from several drawbacks such as limited field of view, loss of signal from time to time, and in some cases, difficulty of interpretation. These limitations become more evident in beating-heart procedures when the surgeon has to perform a surgical procedure in the presence of heart motion. In this paper, we propose dynamic 3-D virtual fixtures (DVFs) to augment the visual guidance system with haptic feedback, to provide the surgeon with more helpful guidance by constraining the surgeon's hand motions thereby protecting sensitive structures. DVFs can be generated from preoperative dynamic magnetic resonance (MR) or computed tomograph (CT) images and then mapped to the patient during surgery. We have validated the feasibility of the proposed method on several simulated surgical tasks using a volunteer's cardiac image dataset. Validation results show that the integration of visual and haptic guidance can permit a user to perform surgical tasks more easily and with reduced error rate. We believe this is the first work presented in the field of virtual fixtures that explicitly considers heart motion.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".