MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979799189 · doi:10.1117/12.535372

Removing radiopaque artifacts from mammograms using area morphology

2004· article· en· W1979799189 on OpenAlexafffund
Michael A. Wirth, Jennifer A. Lyon, Dennis Nikitenko, Alexei Stapinski

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSegmentationComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMammographyMathematical morphologyComputer visionImage segmentationPattern recognition (psychology)Identification (biology)Representation (politics)Image processingImage (mathematics)MedicineBreast cancerBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A mammogram contains two distinctive regions: the exposed breast region and the unexposed air-background region. The background region often contains radiopaque artifacts in the form of identification labels, radiopaque markers, and wedges. The primary motivation for removing such artifacts from mammograms is too lessen their effect on subsequent processing algorithms. For example, accurate segmentation of the breast region is an important pre-processing step in the computerized analysis of mammograms. It allows the search for abnormalities to be limited to the breast region of the mammogram without undue influence from the background. One of the problems with precise segmentation of the breast region is that high-intensity radiopaque artifacts can result in a non-uniform background region, and interfere with deriving an accurate representation of the breast contour. This paper proposes a new approach for removing radiopaque artifacts from the background region of mammograms based on the concept of area morphology. Area morphology uses attributes of structures rather than a fixed shape structuring element as used in classical morphology. This allows radiopaque artifacts to be removed, irrespective of shape.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.214 · 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
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

Citations7
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicAI in cancer detectionFrench-language works237,207