Test Platform for Developing New Optical Position Tracking Technology towards Improved Head Motion Correction in Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Optical tracking of head pose via fiducial markers has been proven to enable effective correction of motion artifacts in the brain during magnetic resonance imaging but remains difficult to implement in the clinic due to lengthy calibration and set up times. Advances in deep learning for markerless head pose estimation have yet to be applied to this problem because of the sub-millimetre spatial resolution required for motion correction. In the present work, two optical tracking systems are described for the development and training of a neural network: one marker-based system (a testing platform for measuring ground truth head pose) with high tracking fidelity to act as the training labels, and one markerless deep-learning-based system using images of the markerless head as input to the network. The markerless system has the potential to overcome issues of marker occlusion, insufficient rigid attachment of the marker, lengthy calibration times, and unequal performance across degrees of freedom (DOF), all of which hamper the adoption of marker-based solutions in the clinic. Detail is provided on the development of a custom moiré-enhanced fiducial marker for use as ground truth and on the calibration procedure for both optical tracking systems. Additionally, the development of a synthetic head pose dataset is described for the proof of concept and initial pre-training of a simple convolutional neural network. Results indicate that the ground truth system has been sufficiently calibrated and can track head pose with an error of <1 mm and <1°. Tracking data of a healthy, adult participant are shown. Pre-training results show that the average root-mean-squared error across the 6 DOF is 0.13 and 0.36 (mm or degrees) on a head model included and excluded from the training dataset, respectively. Overall, this work indicates excellent feasibility of the deep-learning-based approach and will enable future work in training and testing on a real dataset in the MRI environment.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".