A survey of MRI-based brain tumor segmentation methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Brain tumor segmentation aims to separate the different tumor tissues such as active cells, necrotic core, and edema from normal brain tissues of White Matter (WM), Gray Matter (GM), and Cerebrospinal Fluid (CSF). MRI-based brain tumor segmentation studies are attracting more and more attention in recent years due to non-invasive imaging and good soft tissue contrast of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) images. With the development of almost two decades, the innovative approaches applying computer-aided techniques for segmenting brain tumor are becoming more and more mature and coming closer to routine clinical applications. The purpose of this paper is to provide a comprehensive overview for MRI-based brain tumor segmentation methods. Firstly, a brief introduction to brain tumors and imaging modalities of brain tumors is given. Then, the preprocessing operations and the state of the art methods of MRI-based brain tumor segmentation are introduced. Moreover, the evaluation and validation of the results of MRI-based brain tumor segmentation are discussed. Finally, an objective assessment is presented and future developments and trends are addressed for MRI-based brain tumor segmentation methods.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
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".