Head-Mounted Display-Based Augmented Reality for Image-Guided Media Delivery to the Heart: A Preliminary Investigation of Perceptual Accuracy
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
By aligning virtual augmentations with real objects, optical see-through head-mounted display (OST-HMD)-based augmented reality (AR) can enhance user-task performance. Our goal was to compare the perceptual accuracy of several visualization paradigms involving an adjacent monitor, or the Microsoft HoloLens 2 OST-HMD, in a targeted task, as well as to assess the feasibility of displaying imaging-derived virtual models aligned with the injured porcine heart. With 10 participants, we performed a user study to quantify and compare the accuracy, speed, and subjective workload of each paradigm in the completion of a point-and-trace task that simulated surgical targeting. To demonstrate the clinical potential of our system, we assessed its use for the visualization of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based anatomical models, aligned with the surgically exposed heart in a motion-arrested open-chest porcine model. Using the HoloLens 2 with alignment of the ground truth target and our display calibration method, users were able to achieve submillimeter accuracy (0.98 mm) and required 1.42 min for calibration in the point-and-trace task. In the porcine study, we observed good spatial agreement between the MRI-models and target surgical site. The use of an OST-HMD led to improved perceptual accuracy and task-completion times in a simulated targeting task.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it