Three-dimensional periodontal investigations using a prototype handheld ultrasound scanner with spatial positioning reading sensor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To demonstrate the feasibility of the 3D ultrasound periodontal tissue reconstruction of the lateral area of a porcine mandible using standard 2D ultrasound equipment and spatial positioning reading sensors. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Periodontal 3D reconstructions were performed using a free-hand prototype based on a 2D US scanner and a spatial positioning reading sensor. For automated data processing, deep learning algorithms were implemented and trained using semi-automatically seg-mented images by highly specialized imaging professionals. RESULTS: US probe movement analysis showed that non-parallel 2D frames were acquired during the scanning procedure. Comparing 3 different 3D periodontal reconstructions of the same porcine mandible, the accuracy ranged between 0.179 mm and 0.235 mm. CONCLUSION: The present study demonstrated the diagnostic potential of 3D reconstruction using a free-hand 2D US scanner with spatial positioning readings. The use of auto-mated data processing with deep learning algorithms makes the process practical in the clinical environment for assessment of periodontal soft tissues.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".