MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3011243460 · doi:10.1117/12.2549878

Open-source platform for automated collection of training data to support video-based feedback in surgical simulators

2020· article· en· W3011243460 on OpenAlexaff
Jacob Laframboise, Tamás Ungi, Kyle Sunderland, Boris Zevin, Gábor Fichtinger

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Simulation and Training
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceWorkflowTracking (education)Artificial intelligenceSoftware deploymentComputer visionData collectionComputer hardwareDatabaseOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Surgical training could be improved by automatic detection of workflow steps, and similar applications of image processing. A platform to collect and organize tracking and video data would enable rapid development of image processing solutions for surgical training. The purpose of this research is to demonstrate 3D Slicer / PLUS Toolkit as a platform for automatic labelled data collection and model deployment. Methods: We use PLUS and 3D Slicer to collect a labelled dataset of tools interacting with tissues in simulated hernia repair, comprised of optical tracking data and video data from a camera. To demonstrate the platform, we train a neural network on this data to automatically identify tissues, and the tracking data is used to identify what tool is in use. The solution is deployed with a custom Slicer module. Results: This platform allowed the collection of 128,548 labelled frames, with 98.5% correctly labelled. A CNN was trained on this data and applied to new data with an accuracy of 98%. With minimal code, this model was deployed in 3D Slicer on real-time data at 30fps. Conclusion: We found the 3D Slicer and PLUS Toolkit platform to be a viable platform for collecting labelled training data and deploying a solution that combines automatic video processing and optical tool tracking. We designed an accurate proof-of-concept system to identify tissue-tool interactions with a trained CNN and optical tracking.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.012

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 head0.223
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.169 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSurgical Simulation and Training→French-language works237,207→