MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3196552464 · doi:10.1109/lra.2021.3102946

Multiobjective Trajectory Tracking of a Flexible Tool During Robotic Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy

2021· article· en· W3196552464 on OpenAlexafffund
Olivia Wilz, Brayden Kent, Ben Sainsbury, Carlos Rossa

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Robotics and Automation Letters · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKidney Stones and Urolithiasis Treatments
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRobot end effectorPercutaneous nephrolithotomyPath (computing)Artificial intelligenceTrajectoryComputer scienceMotion planningSortingComputer visionRobotMedicinePercutaneousSurgeryAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is the leading intervention for removing large or irregularly shaped kidney stones. It involves gaining access to the kidney through a small incision in the patient's back, through which a nephroscope is steered towards the stones. Despite decades of clinical prevalence, PCNL remains a complex procedure to learn and perform, sometimes requiring several attempts to gain kidney access, leading to a variety of complications. This letter proposes to use robotic assistance to steer a flexible nephroscope during PCNL to concurrently improve accuracy and reduce the risk of tissue damage. The nephroscope is modelled as a cantilever beam fixed to the robot's end-effector. Under the assumption that an optimal tooltip path exists, Non-dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm-II is implemented to determine the end-effector position and orientation so that the tooltip follows the path while minimizing four objective functions, i.e., tissue compression, variations in the tool's strain energy, changes in end-effector position, and tooltip error. Data collected through experiments performed on ex-vivo porcine tissue show that the path tracking error was on average 2.03 mm. The results confirm the accuracy of the model in 2 dimensions and suggest that the multiobjective optimizer returned adequate solutions that minimized 4 different cost functions, altogether allowing the robot to effectively follow the predefined path.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.860
Threshold uncertainty score0.635

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Robotics and Automation LettersSame topicKidney Stones and Urolithiasis TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207