Tool-tissue force segmentation and pattern recognition for evaluating neurosurgical performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Surgical data quantification and comprehension expose subtle patterns in tasks and performance. Enabling surgical devices with artificial intelligence provides surgeons with personalized and objective performance evaluation: a virtual surgical assist. Here we present machine learning models developed for analyzing surgical finesse using tool-tissue interaction force data in surgical dissection obtained from a sensorized bipolar forceps. Data modeling was performed using 50 neurosurgery procedures that involved elective surgical treatment for various intracranial pathologies. The data collection was conducted by 13 surgeons of varying experience levels using sensorized bipolar forceps, SmartForceps System. The machine learning algorithm constituted design and implementation for three primary purposes, i.e., force profile segmentation for obtaining active periods of tool utilization using T-U-Net, surgical skill classification into Expert and Novice, and surgical task recognition into two primary categories of Coagulation versus non-Coagulation using FTFIT deep learning architectures. The final report to surgeon was a dashboard containing recognized segments of force application categorized into skill and task classes along with performance metrics charts compared to expert level surgeons. Operating room data recording of > 161 h containing approximately 3.6 K periods of tool operation was utilized. The modeling resulted in Weighted F1-score = 0.95 and AUC = 0.99 for force profile segmentation using T-U-Net, Weighted F1-score = 0.71 and AUC = 0.81 for surgical skill classification, and Weighted F1-score = 0.82 and AUC = 0.89 for surgical task recognition using a subset of hand-crafted features augmented to FTFIT neural network. This study delivers a novel machine learning module in a cloud, enabling an end-to-end platform for intraoperative surgical performance monitoring and evaluation. Accessed through a secure application for professional connectivity, a paradigm for data-driven learning is established.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".