Automatic search for photoacoustic marker using automated transrectal ultrasound
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Real-time transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) image guidance during robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy has the potential to enhance surgery outcomes. Whether conventional or photoacoustic TRUS is used, the robotic system and the TRUS must be registered to each other. Accurate registration can be performed using photoacoustic (PA markers). However, this requires a manual search by an assistant [ IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett 8 , 1287 ( 2023 ). 10.1109/LRA.2022.3191788 ]. This paper introduces the first automatic search for PA markers using a transrectal ultrasound robot. This effectively reduces the challenges associated with the da Vinci-TRUS registration. This paper investigated the performance of three search algorithms in simulation and experiment: Weighted Average (WA), Golden Section Search (GSS), and Ternary Search (TS). For validation, a surgical prostate scenario was mimicked and various ex vivo tissues were tested. As a result, the WA algorithm can achieve 0.53°±0.30° average error after 9 data acquisitions, while the TS and GSS algorithm can achieve 0.29 ∘ ±0.31 ∘ and 0.48°±0.32° average errors after 28 data acquisitions.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".