MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2241119407 · doi:10.1117/12.382251

<title>Registration of 3D tracked ultrasonic spinal images to segmented CT images for technology-guided therapy</title>

2000· article· en· W2241119407 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Diane M. Muratore, Jeannette L. Herring, Benoît M. Dawant, Robert L. Galloway

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMedical Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsImaging phantomPixelComputer visionArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceImage registrationMedicineNuclear medicineImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As a prerequisite to performing minimally-invasive spinal surgery (MISS) with technology-guided therapy (TGT), researchers at Vanderbilt University have proposed to mathematically align the physical space of the patient with preoperative images through a surface-based registration. In order to support closed-back spinal surgeries, we have selected a non-invasive, portable imaging modality for obtaining intra-operative images, namely ultrasound (U/S). The preliminary work for the application of TGT to spinal cases has been performed on a spine phantom, scanned with an optically-tracked U/S transducer. The lumbar vertebral surface was extracted from the U/S images, and the surface pixels were converted into 3D physical-space coordinates. This set of U/S surface points was divided into a test set and a target set to be used in registration and error measurement, respectively. The test set of U/S points was registered to segmented CT spinal images of the same phantom spine using a modification of the Besl-McKay Iterative Closest Point algorithm. In a qualitative analysis of the registration, the results look favorable. The U/S points closely align with the corresponding CT surface in every image slice. By incorporating TGT into minimally-invasive spinal surgeries, the procedures are expected to yield reduced injury to normal spinal tissue and hence quicker recovery time for the patient.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score0.687

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations1
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicMedical Imaging and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207