MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3130185267 · doi:10.1117/12.2581988

Snake-based interactive tooth segmentation for 3D mandibular meshes

2021· article· en· W3130185267 on OpenAlexaffabout
Rui Yang, Amir H. Abdi, Atabak Eghbal, Edward Wang, Khanh Linh Tran, David H. Yang, Antony J. Hodgson, Eitan Prisman, Sidney Fels

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Radiography and Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDentitionComputer scienceSegmentationArtificial intelligenceDental archPercentilePreprocessorHausdorff distancePremolarComputer visionOrthodonticsMathematicsMedicineStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mandibular meshes segmented from computerized tomography (CT) images contain rich information of the dentition conditions, which impairs the performance of shape completion algorithms relying on such data, but can benefit virtual planning for oral reconstructive surgeries. To locate the alveolar process and remove the dentition area, we propose a tooth segmentation method including a preprocessing step using non-rigid registration, an active contour model, and constructive solid geometry (CSG) operations. An easy-to-use interactive tool is developed, allowing users to adjust the tooth crown contour position. A validation study and a comparison study were conducted for method evaluation. In the validation study, we removed teeth for 28 models acquired from Vancouver General Hospital (VGH) and ran a shape completion test. Regarding 95th percentile Hausdorff distance (HD95), using edentulous models produced significantly better predictions of the premorbid shapes of diseased mandibles than using models with inconsistent dentition conditions(Z = -2.484, p = 0.01). The volumetric Dice score (DSC) shows no significant difference. In the second study, we compared the proposed method to manual removal in terms of manual processing time, symmetric HD95, and symmetric root mean square deviation (RMSD). The result indicates that our method reduced the manual processing time by 40% on average and approached the accuracy of manual tooth segmentation. It is promising to warrant further efforts towards clinical usage. This work forms the basis of a useful tool for coupling jaw reconstruction and restorative dentition for patient treatment planning.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDental Radiography and ImagingFrench-language works237,207