Micro‐CT versus synchrotron radiation phase contrast imaging of human cochlea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High-resolution images of the cochlea are used to develop atlases to extract anatomical features from low-resolution clinical computed tomography (CT) images. We compare visualization and contrast of conventional absorption-based micro-CT to synchrotron radiation phase contrast imaging (SR-PCI) images of whole unstained, nondecalcified human cochleae. Three cadaveric cochleae were imaged using SR-PCI and micro-CT. Images were visually compared and contrast-to-noise ratios (CNRs) were computed from n = 27 regions-of-interest (enclosing soft tissue) for quantitative comparisons. Three-dimensional (3D) models of cochlear internal structures were constructed from SR-PCI images using a semiautomatic segmentation method. SR-PCI images provided superior visualization of soft tissue microstructures over conventional micro-CT images. CNR improved from 7.5 ± 2.5 in micro-CT images to 18.0 ± 4.3 in SR-PCI images (p < 0.0001). The semiautomatic segmentations yielded accurate reconstructions of 3D models of the intracochlear anatomy. The improved visualization, contrast and modelling achieved using SR-PCI images are very promising for developing atlas-based segmentation methods for postoperative evaluation of cochlear implant surgery.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".