Fuzzy classification: towards evaluating performance on a surgical simulator.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Computer-based surgical simulators such as the MIST-VR are able to provide scoring metrics such as time taken to complete a task, number of errors made, and economy of movement. Using MIST-VR's basic metrics, we explored the possibility of classifying skill levels using fuzzy logic. Our objective was to create a fuzzy classifier capable of classifying the performance of a subject training on a surgical simulator into 1 of 3 categories: Novice, Intermediate, and Expert. To accomplish this, we needed to establish a baseline skill level for each category. We had four laparoscopic surgeons, four surgical assistants/residents and four non-surgical staff/students with no laparoscopic experience perform two basic tasks on the simulator involving the placement of a ball into a box. We have found, through this preliminary study, that the results were inconclusive. We suspected a number of issues such as the size of our sample space used to train our classifier, and the difficulty of the chosen tasks adversely affected our results.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".