MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2955175109 · doi:10.1109/mapr.2019.8743530

Registration of Ultrasound and CBCT Images for Enhancing Tooth-Periodontinum Visualization: a Feasibility Study

2019· article· en· W2955175109 on OpenAlexaff
Kim-Cuong T. Nguyen, Neelambar R. Kaipatur, Edmond Lou, Paul W. Major, Kumaradevan Punithakumar, Lawrence H. Le

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Radiography and Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisualizationComputer scienceComputer visionImage registration3D ultrasoundUltrasoundArtificial intelligenceMedical physicsComputer graphics (images)RadiologyMedicineImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Malocclusion, a common dental anomaly, can lead to oral function issues such as difficulty in jaw movement, chewing, speech, and high susceptibility to periodontal diseases. High resolution cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images provide sharp visualization of the alveolar bone while delineation of gingiva is inferior. Ultrasound (US) images can delineate the thickness and extension of gingiva while partially showing the thickness of alveolar bones. Accurate registration of CBCT and US images of the tooth-periodontium would allow oral clinicians to visualize the gingiva and alveolar bone for proper diagnosis and orthodontic treatment. A probability-based point set registration using coherent point drift algorithm is proposed to tackle the problem of aligning CBCT and US images. The proposed algorithm was evaluated with images from human volunteers. The results indicate that the method is reasonably robust, and yield mean errors below the clinically accepted tolerance level of 0.5 mm. The limits of agreement between CBCT and US images measured in terms of landmark-based evaluations were [-0.22 mm, 0.26 mm] for intra-rater and [-0.19 mm, 0.21 mm] for inter-rater, respectively. More data are currently acquired to validate the accuracy and efficacy of the method.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDental Radiography and ImagingFrench-language works237,207