MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Measuring brain atrophy with a generalized formulation of the boundary shift integral

2014· article· en· W1974790621 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ferrán Prados, Kelvin K. Leung, David M. Cash, Marc Modat, Nick C. Fox, Claudia A. M. Gandini Wheeler‐Kingshott, Sébastien Ourselin

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurobiology of Aging · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute on AgingNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilSparksMedical Research Council
KeywordsAtrophyProbabilistic logicImaging biomarkerMagnetic resonance imagingBiomarkerMedicineArtificial intelligenceComputer sciencePathologyPattern recognition (psychology)RadiologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Brain atrophy measured using structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been widely used as an imaging biomarker for disease diagnosis and tracking of pathologic progression in neurodegenerative diseases. In this work, we present a generalized and extended formulation of the boundary shift integral (gBSI) using probabilistic segmentations to estimate anatomic changes between 2 time points. This method adaptively estimates a non-binary exclusive OR region of interest from probabilistic brain segmentations of the baseline and repeat scans to better localize and capture the brain atrophy. We evaluate the proposed method by comparing the sample size requirements for a hypothetical clinical trial of Alzheimer's disease to that needed for the current implementation of BSI as well as a fuzzy implementation of BSI. The gBSI method results in a modest but reduced sample size, providing increased sensitivity to disease changes through the use of the probabilistic exclusive OR region.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.311
Threshold uncertainty score0.196

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.250 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations42
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurobiology of AgingSame topicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207