The last decade has seen an increasing demand from the industrial field of computerized visual inspection. Applications rapidly become more complex and often with more demanding real time constraints. However, from 2004 onwards the clock frequency of CPUs has not increased significantly. Computer Vision applications have an increasing demand for more processing power but are limited by the performance capabilities of sequential processor architectures. The only way to get more performance using commodity hardware, like multi-core processors and graphics cards, is to go for parallel programming. This article focuses on the practical question: How can the processing time for vision algorithms be improved, by parallelization, in an economical way and execute them on multiple platforms?
MULTIFILE
INTRODUCTION: Acquiring practical skills is essential for dental students. These practical skills are assessed throughout their training, both formatively and summatively. However, by means of visual inspection alone, assessment cannot always be performed objectively. A computerized evaluation system may serve as an objective tool to assist the assessor.AIM: The aim of the study is to evaluate prepCheck as a tool to assess students' practical skills and as a means to provide feedback in dental education.METHODS: As part of a previously scheduled practical examination, students made a preparation for a retentive crown on the maxillary right central incisor - tooth 11. Assessments were made four times by two independent assessors in two different ways: a) conventionally and b) assisted by prepCheck. By means of Cohen's kappa coefficient, agreements between conventional and digitally assisted assessments were compared. Questionnaires were used to assess how students experienced working with prepCheck.RESULTS: Without the use of prepCheck, ratings given by teachers differed considerably (mean κ = 0.19), whereas the differences with prepCheck assistance were very small (mean κ = 0.96). Students found prepCheck a helpful tool for teachers to assess practical skills. Extra feedback given by prepCheck was considered useful and effective. However, some students complained about too few scanners and too little time for practice, and some believed that prepCheck is too strict.CONCLUSION: prepCheck can be used to assist assessors in order to obtain a more objective outcome. Results showed that practicing with feedback from both prepCheck and the teacher contributes to an effective learning process. Most students appreciated prepCheck for learning practical skills, but introducing prepCheck requires enough equipment and preparation time.
