MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1542499753 · doi:10.1109/mwscas.2003.1562307

Region of Interest Identification in Prostate TRUS mages Based on Gabor Filter

2006· article· en· W1542499753 on OpenAlexaff
Samar Mohamed, Ehab F. El‐Saadany, T.K. Abdel-Galil, Ju Shen, M.M.A. Salama, Aaron Fenster, D.B. Downey, Kamilia Rizkalla

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMedical Image Segmentation Techniques
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrey levelRegion of interestArtificial intelligenceGabor filterComputer visionContrast (vision)Computer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Feature (linguistics)Texture (cosmology)Filter (signal processing)Image textureFeature extractionImage (mathematics)Image segmentation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a new algorithm for prostate texture classification based on transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) images. A Gabor filter is designed to automatically identify the regions of interest (ROI) in the image. Furthermore, texture analysis for these regions is carried out by employing grey level co-occurrence matrix GLCM. Contrast feature is found to be useful for the differentiation between cancerous and non-cancerous tissues. The obtained results demonstrate that the contrast level in normal tissue is higher than that of cancerous tissue

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.912
Threshold uncertainty score0.212

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations4
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMedical Image Segmentation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207