Performing label-fusion-based segmentation using multiple automatically generated templates
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Classically, model-based segmentation procedures match magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) volumes to an expertly labeled atlas using nonlinear registration. The accuracy of these techniques are limited due to atlas biases, misregistration, and resampling error. Multi-atlas-based approaches are used as a remedy and involve matching each subject to a number of manually labeled templates. This approach yields numerous independent segmentations that are fused using a voxel-by-voxel label-voting procedure. In this article, we demonstrate how the multi-atlas approach can be extended to work with input atlases that are unique and extremely time consuming to construct by generating a library of multiple automatically generated templates of different brains (MAGeT Brain). We demonstrate the efficacy of our method for the mouse and human using two different nonlinear registration algorithms (ANIMAL and ANTs). The input atlases consist a high-resolution mouse brain atlas and an atlas of the human basal ganglia and thalamus derived from serial histological data. MAGeT Brain segmentation improves the identification of the mouse anterior commissure (mean Dice Kappa values (κ = 0.801), but may be encountering a ceiling effect for hippocampal segmentations. Applying MAGeT Brain to human subcortical structures improves segmentation accuracy for all structures compared to regular model-based techniques (κ = 0.845, 0.752, and 0.861 for the striatum, globus pallidus, and thalamus, respectively). Experiments performed with three manually derived input templates suggest that MAGeT Brain can approach or exceed the accuracy of multi-atlas label-fusion segmentation (κ = 0.894, 0.815, and 0.895 for the striatum, globus pallidus, and thalamus, respectively).
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it