MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3193971877 · doi:10.1016/j.xops.2021.100054

Optimizing Color Performance of the Ngenuity 3-Dimensional Visualization System

2021· article· en· W3193971877 on OpenAlexaff
Samuel A. Minaker, Ryan H. Mason, David R. Chow

Bibliographic record

VenueOphthalmology Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Radiotherapy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColorimeterColor balanceArtificial intelligenceLuminanceComputer visionMagnificationComputer scienceColor spaceVideographyMathematicsComputer graphics (images)OpticsImage processingColor imagePhysicsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose To evaluate the effect of surgeon-controlled parameters on the color performance of the Ngenuity 3-dimensional (3D) visualization system. Design A calibrated reference target was placed inside a model eye to assess the Ngenuity 3D camera under different settings. The Ngenuity 3D display was assessed with a commercial colorimeter. Methods Manufacturer-recommended methodology for white balancing was compared against all common deviations in technique. Following white balance, images of a calibrated reference target were extracted and tested using Imatest Master software to calculate quantitative color differences (delta E and delta C). The Ngenuity monitor was assessed using a SpyderX Elite commercial colorimeter to assess for image burn-in by quantifying color uniformity and maximum luminescence. Main Outcome Measures Delta E and delta C were calculated for all variables. Color uniformity and luminance were assessed in candelas per square meter (nits). Results Color performance using the manufacturer-recommended specifications yielded a delta E of 12.81 ± 1.67. Changing the white balance target to a videography grey card ( P = 0.07) and 4 × 4 gauze ( P = 0.37) provided similar performance, whereas using white computer paper or the operator's palm significantly increased the delta E from 12.81 ± 1.67 to 15.28 ± 1.22 ( P = 0.01) and 17.71 ± 2.03 ( P < 0.01), respectively. Changes to card position, magnification, stability, or ambient lighting did not significantly impact white balance results, whereas having the card in crisp focus did decrease color accuracy (15.78 ± 1.63; P = 0.03). Minor improvement in performance occurred when the laser filter was off for white balance and image acquisition (9.28 ± 0.25; P < 0.01), but deterioration occurred if the laser filter was placed after balancing (16.59 ± 1.17; P < 0.01). Both light sources of 23-gauge light pipe at 34% intensity and 25-gauge chandelier at 50% intensity gave similar color accuracy ( P = 0.37). When comparing different Ngenuity machines, color uniformity and maximum luminescence decreased with increased device use. Conclusions Overall, the Ngenuity 3D has robust color performance. A few limitations of both the camera and monitor were identified, and surgeons should be aware of these pitfalls as well as solutions examined herein to mitigate their effects during surgery.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Citations38
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOphthalmology ScienceSame topicAdvanced Radiotherapy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207