Bridging 3D Slicer and ROS2 for Image-Guided Robotic Interventions
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
Developing image-guided robotic systems requires access to flexible, open-source software. For image guidance, the open-source medical imaging platform 3D Slicer is one of the most adopted tools that can be used for research and prototyping. Similarly, for robotics, the open-source middleware suite robot operating system (ROS) is the standard development framework. In the past, there have been several "ad hoc" attempts made to bridge both tools; however, they are all reliant on middleware and custom interfaces. Additionally, none of these attempts have been successful in bridging access to the full suite of tools provided by ROS or 3D Slicer. Therefore, in this paper, we present the SlicerROS2 module, which was designed for the direct use of ROS2 packages and libraries within 3D Slicer. The module was developed to enable real-time visualization of robots, accommodate different robot configurations, and facilitate data transfer in both directions (between ROS and Slicer). We demonstrate the system on multiple robots with different configurations, evaluate the system performance and discuss an image-guided robotic intervention that can be prototyped with this module. This module can serve as a starting point for clinical system development that reduces the need for custom interfaces and time-intensive platform setup.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it