A Very Fast and Robust Method for Refinement of Putative Matches of Features in MIS Images for Robotic-Assisted Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Robotic-assisted minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has a very important place in the landscape of modern surgical practices. Simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM), 3D visualization, augmented reality, image registration and mosaicking are some of the image processing operations, which are often feature-based, used in robotic-assisted surgery. Feature matching refinement (FMR) is a crucial task in such operations. FMR is more critical, in cases where the percentage of true matches is very low, which is generally the case for MIS images. Since real-time is a requisite of MIS tasks, an FMR scheme must be very fast. In this paper we propose a very fast and accurate FMR scheme. The main idea used in developing the proposed scheme is on deciding the size of a local neighborhood and on devising a mechanism for checking feature topology preservation in the local neighborhood. To assess the effectiveness of the proposed scheme, we compare its performance with that of several state-of-the-art methods on different MIS image datasets, which shows its superiority in terms of both the processing time and 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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".