MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3138505695

Automatic C-arm Positioning Using Multi-Functional User Interface

2019· article· en· W3138505695 on OpenAlexaff
Mustafa Haiderbhai, J. Guerrero Turrubiates, Vinod Gutta, Pascal Fallavollita

Bibliographic record

VenueCMBES Proceedings · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Simulation and Training
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkflowInterface (matter)Computer scienceComputer visionPosition (finance)VisualizationKinematicsWorkspaceInverse kinematicsGround truthArtificial intelligenceDegrees of freedom (physics and chemistry)Robotic armUser interfaceSimulationRobot
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

C-arm positioning is a critical step of the surgical workflow. The traditional method is often time consuming and results in additional radiation exposure to the patient and surgical staff. We propose a user interface that allows surgeons to interact with a simulated X-ray 3D reconstruction of the patient’s anatomy. Optimal views chosen by the surgeon with the simulated X-ray are used to calculate the C-arm position required to achieve that view. The proposed system uses pre-operative CT data to generate a 3D model, and inverse kinematics with 6 degrees of freedom to calculate the C-arm joint parameters. Day of surgery patient position variations are factored in through registration methods using the Kinect. Quantitative results were validated by comparing outputs with ground truths, and results indicate our method can output C-arm position values close to the truth considering the limitation of working with truncated values. Automatic positioning reduces radiation by minimizing typical positioning errors. Future work will include the integration of radiation exposure measurements and visualization into the user interface.

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)0.004
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCMBES ProceedingsSame topicSurgical Simulation and TrainingFrench-language works237,207