Force Profile as Surgeon-Specific Signature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the notion that a surgeon's force profile can be the signature of their identity and performance. Summary background data: Surgeon performance in the operating room is an understudied topic. The advent of deep learning methods paired with a sensorized surgical device presents an opportunity to incorporate quantitative insight into surgical performance and processes. Using a device called the SmartForceps System and through automated analytics, we have previously reported surgeon force profile, surgical skill, and task classification. However, an investigation of whether an individual surgeon can be identified by surgical technique has yet to be studied. Methods: In this study, we investigate multiple neural network architectures to identify the surgeon associated with their time-series tool-tissue forces using bipolar forceps data. The surgeon associated with each 10-second window of force data was labeled, and the data were randomly split into 80% for model training and validation (10% validation) and 20% for testing. Data imbalance was mitigated through subsampling from more populated classes with a random size adjustment based on 0.1% of sample counts in the respective class. An exploratory analysis of force segments was performed to investigate underlying patterns differentiating individual surgical techniques. Results: In a dataset of 2819 ten-second time segments from 89 neurosurgical cases, the best-performing model achieved a micro-average area under the curve of 0.97, a testing F1-score of 0.82, a sensitivity of 82%, and a precision of 82%. This model was a time-series ResNet model to extract features from the time-series data followed by a linearized output into the XGBoost algorithm. Furthermore, we found that convolutional neural networks outperformed long short-term memory networks in performance and speed. Using a weighted average approach, an ensemble model was able to identify an expert surgeon with 83.8% accuracy using a validation dataset. Conclusions: Our results demonstrate that each surgeon has a unique force profile amenable to identification using deep learning methods. We anticipate our models will enable a quantitative framework to provide bespoke feedback to surgeons and to track their skill progression longitudinally. Furthermore, the ability to recognize individual surgeons introduces the mechanism of correlating outcome to surgeon performance.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".