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 OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

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

PurposeTo evaluate the effect of surgeon-controlled parameters on the color performance of the Ngenuity 3-dimensional (3D) visualization system.DesignA 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.MethodsManufacturer-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 MeasuresDelta E and delta C were calculated for all variables. Color uniformity and luminance were assessed in candelas per square meter (nits).ResultsColor 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.ConclusionsOverall, 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. To evaluate the effect of surgeon-controlled parameters on the color performance of the Ngenuity 3-dimensional (3D) visualization system. 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. 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. Delta E and delta C were calculated for all variables. Color uniformity and luminance were assessed in candelas per square meter (nits). 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. 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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.258
Threshold uncertainty score0.203

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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