MODELLING ERRORS IN X-RAY FLUOROSCOPIC IMAGING SYSTEMS USING PHOTOGRAMMETRIC BUNDLE ADJUSTMENT WITH A DATA-DRIVEN SELF-CALIBRATION APPROACH
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. X-ray imaging is a fundamental tool of routine clinical diagnosis. Fluoroscopic imaging can further acquire X-ray images at video frame rates, thus enabling non-invasive in-vivo motion studies of joints, gastrointestinal tract, etc. For both the qualitative and quantitative analysis of static and dynamic X-ray images, the data should be free of systematic biases. Besides precise fabrication of hardware, software-based calibration solutions are commonly used for modelling the distortions. In this primary research study, a robust photogrammetric bundle adjustment was used to model the projective geometry of two fluoroscopic X-ray imaging systems. However, instead of relying on an expert photogrammetrist’s knowledge and judgement to decide on a parametric model for describing the systematic errors, a self-tuning data-driven approach is used to model the complex non-linear distortion profile of the sensors. Quality control from the experiment showed that 0.06 mm to 0.09 mm 3D reconstruction accuracy was achievable post-calibration using merely 15 X-ray images. As part of the bundle adjustment, the location of the virtual fluoroscopic system relative to the target field can also be spatially resected with an RMSE between 3.10 mm and 3.31 mm.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".