An Exploration of Augmented Reality in Computer Assisted Orthopaedic Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Computer Aided Surgery (CAS) is helpful, but it clutters an already overcrowded operating theatre, and tends to disrupt the workflow of conventional surgery. In order to provide seamless computer assistance with improved immersion and a more natural surgical workflow, we propose an augmented-reality based navigation system for CAS. Here, we choose to focus on the proximal femoral anatomy, which we register to a plan by processing depth information of the surgical site captured by a commercial depth camera. Intra-operative three-dimensional surgical guidance is then provided to the surgeon through a commercial augmented reality headset, to drill a pilot hole in the femoral head, so that the user can perform the operation without additional physical guides. The user can interact intuitively with the system by simple gestures and voice commands, resulting in a more natural workflow. To assess the surgical accuracy of the proposed setup, 30 experiments of pilot hole drilling were performed on femur phantoms. The position and the orientation of the drilled guide holes were measured and compared with the preoperative plan, and the mean errors were within 2mm and 2°, results which are in line with commercial computer assisted orthopedic systems today.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| 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".