Musculoskeletal ultrasound for 3D bone modeling: A preliminary study applied to lumbar vertebra
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is no non-invasive in vivo method to assess intervertebral kinematics. Current kinematics models are based on in vitro bone reconstructions from computed tomography (CT)-scan imaging, fluoroscopy and MRIs, which are either expensive or deleterious for human tissues. Musculoskeletal ultrasound is an accessible, easy to use and cost-effective device that allows high-resolution, real-time imaging of bone structure. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this preliminary study was to compare the concordance of 3D bone modeling of lumbar vertebrae between CT-scan and ultrasound imaging and to study the intra and inter-reliability of distances measured on 3D ultrasound bone models. METHODS: CT-scan, ultrasound, and in situ data of five lumbar vertebrae from the same human specimen were used. All vertebrae were scanned by tomography and a new musculoskeletal ultrasound procedure. Then, 3D bone modeling was created from both CT-scan and ultrasound image data set. Distances between anatomical bones landmarks were measured on the 3D models and compared to in situ measurements.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".