MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1943028203 · doi:10.1515/itit-2015-0011

Model-based analysis of cerebrovascular diseases combining 3D and 4D MRA datasets

2015· article· en· W1943028203 on OpenAlexaff
Nils D. Forkert

Bibliographic record

Venueit - Information Technology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMedical Image Segmentation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisualizationStroke (engine)SegmentationComputer scienceCerebral blood flowBlood flowHigh resolutionMedicineArtificial intelligenceRadiologyCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The cerebral stroke is a major cause for death and disability. Clinical diagnosis, therapy, and research of stroke can considerably benefit from modern image acquisition methods, which enable a detailed analysis of cerebral blood vessel anatomy as well as an examination of macrovascular and tissue blood flow dynamics. However, visual screening of these datasets can be complex and time-consuming due to the vast amount of data. This article provides an overview of a dissertation, which addresses the problem of an automatic combined analysis and visualization of high-resolution 3D and spatiotemporal (4D) image sequences from the same patient to support diagnosis, treatment decision, and research of cerebrovascular diseases. Therefore, automatic methods for the cerebrovascular segmentation, analysis of the cerebral blood flow and tissue perfusion, as well as the combined quantitative analysis and visualization of the vessel morphology and blood flow dynamics were developed. Apart from a potential clinical application, the developed methods have already proven useful in multiple clinical research studies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueit - Information TechnologySame topicMedical Image Segmentation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207