MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Real-Time Simulation of Ultrasound Image Deformation Using Thin Plate Spline

2025· article· en· W4413145213 on OpenAlexaff
Kian Zalzalah, Sathiyamoorthy Selladurai, Carlos Rossa

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Shape Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpline (mechanical)Computer scienceThin plate splineDeformation (meteorology)Computer visionArtificial intelligenceUltrasoundComputer graphics (images)Materials scienceAcousticsSpline interpolationStructural engineeringEngineeringComposite materialPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Finite element modelling (FEM) has been the primary approach for non-rigid medical image registration and simulating image deformation in virtual models. A notable limitation of FEM is the high computational cost and the challenges associated with model identification in heterogeneous tissue. In this paper, we propose using thin plate spline (TPS) as an alternative for simulating image deformation during ultrasound-guided needle insertion. Unlike FEM, in TPS non-rigid deformations are simulated by moving a point in the mesh to a target location, and recalculating the location of all other points such that bending energy is minimized, potentially making experimental model identification easier.We propose a novel formulation to convert needle-tissue interaction forces, including tissue cutting, friction, and relaxation, into localized nodal displacements that serve as inputs to the TPS model. As the needle moves, it alters the input to the TPS based on its speed, direction, and depth, resulting in a real-time update of the mesh. These updates enable the TPS to adapt continuously, ensuring that the mesh mimics the tissue response. The proposed model is compared against an equivalent FEM model in a series of simulations and experiments in ex-vivo porcine tissue. The results show that both models have similar accuracy with TPS being consistently faster than FEM, with improvements in computational efficiency of above 50%. These results confirm the potential of the proposed method to be integrated into ultrasound-guided surgical simulation to enhance precision with larger meshes while reducing computational burden.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topic3D Shape Modeling and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207