MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2322642208 · doi:10.1109/embc.2014.6944908

An augmented reality framework for optimization of computer assisted navigation in endovascular surgery

2014· article· en· W2322642208 on OpenAlexaff
Irene Cheng, Rui Shen, Richard Moreau, V. Brizzi, Nathaniel Rossol, Anup Basu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAugmented Reality Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAugmented realityImaging phantomEndovascular surgeryVirtual realityComputer scienceNavigation systemHaptic technologyMedical physicsHuman–computer interactionArtificial intelligenceComputer visionSimulationSurgeryRadiologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Endovascular surgery is performed by placing a catheter through blood vessels. Due to the fragility of arteries and the difficulty in controlling a long elastic wire to reach the target region, training plays an extremely important role in helping a surgeon acquire the required complex skills. Virtual reality simulators and augmented reality systems have proven to be effective in minimally invasive surgical training. These systems, however, often employ pre-captured or computer-generated medical images. We have developed an augmented reality system for ultrasound-guided endovascular surgical training, where real ultrasound images captured during the procedure are registered with a pre-scanned phantom model to give the operator a realistic experience. Our goal is to extend the planning and training environment to deliver a system for computer assisted remote endovascular surgery where the navigation of a catheter can be controlled through a robotic device based on the guidance provided by an endovascular surgeon.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations16
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAugmented Reality ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207