MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402569920 · doi:10.1109/tie.2024.3451138

AI-Powered Robust Interaction Force Control of a Cardiac Ultrasound Robotic System

2024· article· en· W4402569920 on OpenAlexafffund
Ehsan Zakeri, Amanda Spilkin, Hanae Elmekki, Antonela Zanuttini, Lyes Kadem, Jamal Bentahar, Wenfang Xie, Philippe Pîbarot

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSoft Robotics and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalConcordia University
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceControl systemMedical roboticsControl engineeringEngineeringArtificial intelligenceRobotElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article introduces a novel intelligent robust interaction force control method for a cardiac ultrasound robotic system (CURS), exploiting dual control loops and artificial intelligence (AI)-driven image feedback to enhance both image quality and patient safety during cardiac examinations. Unlike existing systems that use a constant interaction force, the proposed method adjusts the force based on ultrasound image feedback, which is critical for adapting to different cardiac views. The system employs an internal control loop, where the force feedback generates control commands (low-level controller), and an external control loop, where the feedback is processed through a convolutional neural network (CNN), named ultrasound-cardiac-feature-net (UCF-Net), determines the optimal force values (high-level controller). An adaptive filtered quasi-sliding mode controller (AFQSMC) manages both interaction force and probe’s position within a hybrid position/force control context, ensuring robustness against uncertainties and disturbances. Experimental evaluations on a cardiac phantom navigating main cardiac views demonstrate the superiority of the proposed approach over traditional constant force control. Moreover, AFQSMC achieves significant improvements in interaction force control, with enhancements ranging from 21.87% to 68.25% over traditional FQSMC, sliding mode control (SMC), and proportional-integral (PI) controllers, across quantitative metrics such as root mean square (RMS), standard deviation (STD), and Max, confirming its potential for improving cardiac examination 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.212 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Industrial ElectronicsSame topicSoft Robotics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207