MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2797337496 · doi:10.1155/2018/9204949

A Novel Haptic Interactive Approach to Simulation of Surgery Cutting Based on Mesh and Meshless Models

2018· article· en· W2797337496 on OpenAlexaff
Qiangqiang Cheng, Peter Liu, Pinhua Lai, Shaoping Xu, Yanni Zou

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Healthcare Engineering · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Numerical Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Beijing MunicipalityNanchang UniversityEducation Department of Jiangxi ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceRendering (computer graphics)Bézier curveMeshfree methodsHaptic technologySimulationArtificial intelligenceFinite element methodMathematicsEngineeringGeometryStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the present work, the majority of implemented virtual surgery simulation systems have been based on either a mesh or meshless strategy with regard to soft tissue modelling. To take full advantage of the mesh and meshless models, a novel coupled soft tissue cutting model is proposed. Specifically, the reconstructed virtual soft tissue consists of two essential components. One is associated with surface mesh that is convenient for surface rendering and the other with internal meshless point elements that is used to calculate the force feedback during cutting. To combine two components in a seamless way, virtual points are introduced. During the simulation of cutting, the Bezier curve is used to characterize smooth and vivid incision on the surface mesh. At the same time, the deformation of internal soft tissue caused by cutting operation can be treated as displacements of the internal point elements. Furthermore, we discussed and proved the stability and convergence of the proposed approach theoretically. The real biomechanical tests verified the validity of the introduced model. And the simulation experiments show that the proposed approach offers high computational efficiency and good visual effect, enabling cutting of soft tissue with high stability.

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)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations14
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Healthcare EngineeringSame topicAdvanced Numerical Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207