MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2248601831 · doi:10.1117/12.387721

<title>3D reconstruction of a human heart fascicle using SurfDriver</title>

2000· article· en· W2248601831 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Robert J. Rader, Steven J. Phillips, Paul S. LaFollette

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAnatomy and Medical Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceStylusMerge (version control)Computer visionComputer graphics (images)Computer scienceSoftwareVisualizationDigitizationInformation retrieval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Temple University Medical School has a sequence of over 400 serial sections of adult normal ventricular human heart tissue, cut at 25 micrometer thickness. We used a Zeiss Ultraphot with a 4x planapo objective and a Pixera digital camera to make a series of 45 sequential montages to use in the 3D reconstruction of a fascicle (muscle bundle). We wrote custom software to merge 4 smaller image fields from each section into one composite image. We used SurfDriver software, developed by Scott Lozanoff of the University of Hawaii and David Moody of the University of Alberta, for registration, object boundary identification, and 3D surface reconstruction. We used an Epson Stylus Color 900 printer to get photo-quality prints. We describe the challenge and our solution to the following problems: image acquisition and digitization, image merge, alignment and registration, boundary identification, 3D surface reconstruction, 3D visualization and orientation, snapshot, and photo-quality prints.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.281

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0840.018

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 head0.225
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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 topicAnatomy and Medical TechnologyFrench-language works237,207