A Soft Labeling Approach to Develop Automated Algorithms that Incorporate Uncertainty in Pulmonary Opacification on Chest CT using COVID-19 Pneumonia
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Rationale and ObjectivesHard data labels for automated algorithm training are binary and cannot incorporate uncertainty between labels. We proposed and evaluated a soft labeling methodology to quantify opacification and percent well-aerated lung (%WAL) on chest CT, that considers uncertainty in segmenting pulmonary opacifications and reduces labeling burden.Materials and MethodsWe retrospectively sourced 760 COVID-19 chest CT scans from five international centers between January and June 2020. We created pixel-wise labels for >27,000 axial slices that classify three pulmonary opacification patterns: pure ground-glass, crazy-paving, consolidation. We also quantified %WAL as the total area of lung without opacifications. Inter-user hard label variability was quantified using Shannon entropy (range=0-1.39, low-high entropy/variability). We incorporated a soft labeling and modeling cycle following an initial model with hard labels and compared performance using point-wise accuracy and intersection-over-union of opacity labels with ground-truth, and correlation with ground-truth %WAL.ResultsHard labels annotated by 12 radiologists demonstrated large inter-user variability (3.37% of pixels achieved complete agreement). Our soft labeling approach increased point-wise accuracy from 60.0% to 84.3% (p=0.01) compared to hard labeling at predicting opacification type and area involvement. The soft label model accurately predicted %WAL (R=0.900) compared to the hard label model (R=0.856), but the improvement was not statistically significant (p=0.349).ConclusionOur soft labeling approach increased accuracy for automated quantification and classification of pulmonary opacification on chest CT. Although we developed the model on COVID-19, our intent is broad application for pulmonary opacification contexts and to provide a foundation for future development using soft labeling methods. Hard data labels for automated algorithm training are binary and cannot incorporate uncertainty between labels. We proposed and evaluated a soft labeling methodology to quantify opacification and percent well-aerated lung (%WAL) on chest CT, that considers uncertainty in segmenting pulmonary opacifications and reduces labeling burden. We retrospectively sourced 760 COVID-19 chest CT scans from five international centers between January and June 2020. We created pixel-wise labels for >27,000 axial slices that classify three pulmonary opacification patterns: pure ground-glass, crazy-paving, consolidation. We also quantified %WAL as the total area of lung without opacifications. Inter-user hard label variability was quantified using Shannon entropy (range=0-1.39, low-high entropy/variability). We incorporated a soft labeling and modeling cycle following an initial model with hard labels and compared performance using point-wise accuracy and intersection-over-union of opacity labels with ground-truth, and correlation with ground-truth %WAL. Hard labels annotated by 12 radiologists demonstrated large inter-user variability (3.37% of pixels achieved complete agreement). Our soft labeling approach increased point-wise accuracy from 60.0% to 84.3% (p=0.01) compared to hard labeling at predicting opacification type and area involvement. The soft label model accurately predicted %WAL (R=0.900) compared to the hard label model (R=0.856), but the improvement was not statistically significant (p=0.349). Our soft labeling approach increased accuracy for automated quantification and classification of pulmonary opacification on chest CT. Although we developed the model on COVID-19, our intent is broad application for pulmonary opacification contexts and to provide a foundation for future development using soft labeling methods.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».