Image-Based Force Estimation in Medical Applications: A Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Minimally invasive robotic interventions have highlighted the need to develop efficient techniques to measure forces applied to the soft tissues. Since the last decade, many scholars have focused on micro-scale and macro-scale robotic manipulations. Early articles used the model of soft tissue mathematically and tracked the displacement of the contour of the object in the vision system to provide the corresponding force to the user. Lack of knowledge of different materials and the computational complexity led to a transition from model-based to learning-based approaches to interpret the relation between object deformations, extracted from the vision system, and the real forces applied to the object. The dramatic growth of machine learning techniques and its integration with computer vision has brought novel learning-based visual data processing methods to the area. The application of the image-based force estimation methods in a controlled medical intervention has also received significant attention in the last five years. A decent number of surveys have been published on micromanipulation in recent years, especially for cell microinjection. However, the state of the art in meso- and macro-scale medical robotic interventions has not been reviewed. The aim and contribution of this paper are to fill the stated gap by reviewing the recent advances in image-based force estimation in robotic interventions. The survey shows that learning-based force estimation methods are growing significantly by using deep learning-based methods. The survey will encourage researchers and surgeons to apply learning-based algorithms to real-time medical and health-related operations.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
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".