Cirrhotic liver: What's that nodule? The LI‐RADS approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) is an American College of Radiology (ACR)-endorsed diagnostic system of standardized terminology, interpretation, and reporting for imaging examinations of the liver in patients at high risk for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). LI-RADS assigns a category to observations in the liver indicating the likelihood of benignity or HCC. LI-RADS categories include LR-1: Definitely Benign, LR-2: Probably Benign, LR-3: Intermediate Probability for HCC, LR-4: Probably HCC, LR-5: Definite HCC, LR-5V: Definite HCC with Tumor in Vein, LR-Treated: Treated HCC, LR-M Probable Malignancy, not specific for HCC. This article reviews the types of nodules seen in the cirrhotic liver, examines core LI-RADS concepts and definitions, and utilizes the LI-RADS v2014 algorithm to categorize representative observations depicted at magnetic resonance imaging in a case-based approach.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".