Gesture‐based registration correction using a mobile augmented reality image‐guided neurosurgery system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In image-guided neurosurgery, a registration between the patient and their pre-operative images and the tracking of surgical tools enables GPS-like guidance to the surgeon. However, factors such as brainshift, image distortion, and registration error cause the patient-to-image alignment accuracy to degrade throughout the surgical procedure no longer providing accurate guidance. The authors present a gesture-based method for manual registration correction to extend the usage of augmented reality (AR) neuronavigation systems. The authors' method, which makes use of the touchscreen capabilities of a tablet on which the AR navigation view is presented, enables surgeons to compensate for the effects of brainshift, misregistration, or tracking errors. They tested their system in a laboratory user study with ten subjects and found that they were able to achieve a median registration RMS error of 3.51 mm on landmarks around the craniotomy of interest. This is comparable to the level of accuracy attainable with previously proposed methods and currently available commercial systems while being simpler and quicker to use. The method could enable surgeons to quickly and easily compensate for most of the observed shift. Further advantages of their method include its ease of use, its small impact on the surgical workflow and its small-time requirement.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".