MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Virtual Anatomist: A Deep Learning‐based Smartphone Application to Identify Complex Anatomical Features in Augmented Reality

2021· article· en· W3170104925 on OpenAlexaff
Rohit Malyala

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAnatomy and Medical Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSegmentationHuman–computer interactionVirtual realityDeep learningArtificial intelligenceMultimedia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study pertains to the development of a smartphone mixed‐reality (MR) educational app intended to improve the experience of using physical 3D models in classrooms by identifying and labeling various anatomical features on models, built on a deep‐learning based computer vision framework. Research at the intersection of MR applications and anatomy education has routinely demonstrated a role for new MR‐based modalities in improving anatomy education, but most MR apps rely on custom illustrated projections of 3D‐models into user and screen space. These virtual assets are subject to device‐intrinsic or developer‐based differences in display fidelity and specimen art quality. An intrinsic barrier is present in the development of digital 3D models, which are not trivial to create. Existing evidence also suggests that virtual models may produce inferior results for learning in some use‐cases compared to existing physical models. Such evidence forms a case to instead place emphasis on improving the experience of using existing physical models. The described application is hence intended to improve the experience of using real models by labeling anatomical features of interest for the user. The current implementation of the application is trained solely on skull‐base anatomy (with class labels including selected bones of the calvarium, paranasal sinuses, and skull processes), but may be extended to other anatomical areas of interest. This labeling is made possible by a hybrid depth‐estimation and semantic segmentation‐focused machine learning (ML) architecture, which is deployed on consumer‐grade smartphones to promote student uptake. When creating ML‐based tools, the primary barrier is often the generation of quality ground truth data. Image collections of anatomical specimens must ideally be taken under different conditions, with different augmentations applied to images to improve the ability of the application to robustly recognize and label different parts of a specimen. Manual collection and annotation of the hundreds or thousands of such images required for training is infeasible. However, using procedurally generated images from a 3D‐modelled skull (here, in the open‐source computer graphics software Blender ), developers can produce arbitrarily large, photorealistic ground‐truth training datasets with pixel‐perfect semantic segmentation of anatomical features. The generalizability of the ML classifier to different models was improved through augmentation of individual renders in Blender by randomizing the model textures; lighting; background environments; skull topology via displacement mapping; the use of “distractor” objects in renders; and camera angles. This work demonstrates the feasibility of developing an anatomical landmark classifier from RGB‐image data, trained on fully synthetic data. Future steps include optimization of data augmentations to emphasize shape recognition over texture recognition, formal characterization of segmentation accuracy on cadaveric specimens, and to train alternative models to incorporate depth data, to leverage depth‐sensing capabilities that are available on select higher‐end mobile devices.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.003

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicAnatomy and Medical TechnologyFrench-language works237,207