The force pyramid: a spatial analysis of force application during virtual reality brain tumor resection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Virtual reality simulators allow development of novel methods to analyze neurosurgical performance. The concept of a force pyramid is introduced as a Tier 3 metric with the ability to provide visual and spatial analysis of 3D force application by any instrument used during simulated tumor resection. This study was designed to answer 3 questions: 1) Do study groups have distinct force pyramids? 2) Do handedness and ergonomics influence force pyramid structure? 3) Are force pyramids dependent on the visual and haptic characteristics of simulated tumors? METHODS Using a virtual reality simulator, NeuroVR (formerly NeuroTouch), ultrasonic aspirator force application was continually assessed during resection of simulated brain tumors by neurosurgeons, residents, and medical students. The participants performed simulated resections of 18 simulated brain tumors with different visual and haptic characteristics. The raw data, namely, coordinates of the instrument tip as well as contact force values, were collected by the simulator. To provide a visual and qualitative spatial analysis of forces, the authors created a graph, called a force pyramid, representing force sum along the z-coordinate for different xy coordinates of the tool tip. RESULTS Sixteen neurosurgeons, 15 residents, and 84 medical students participated in the study. Neurosurgeon, resident and medical student groups displayed easily distinguishable 3D "force pyramid fingerprints." Neurosurgeons had the lowest force pyramids, indicating application of the lowest forces, followed by resident and medical student groups. Handedness, ergonomics, and visual and haptic tumor characteristics resulted in distinct well-defined 3D force pyramid patterns. CONCLUSIONS Force pyramid fingerprints provide 3D spatial assessment displays of instrument force application during simulated tumor resection. Neurosurgeon force utilization and ergonomic data form a basis for understanding and modulating resident force application and improving patient safety during tumor resection.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".