MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2005786286 · doi:10.1117/12.431014

<title>Segmentation of ulcerated plaque: evaluation and optimization of a semiautomatic method for tracking the progression of carotid atherosclerosis</title>

2001· article· en· W2005786286 on OpenAlexaff
Jeremy D. Gill, Hanif M. Ladak, Aaron Fenster

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSegmentationIterative closest pointLumen (anatomy)Volume (thermodynamics)Tracking (education)Biomedical engineeringA priori and a posterioriUltrasoundComputer visionImage segmentationArtificial intelligenceMedicineComputer scienceNuclear medicineRadiologyPhysicsSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A semi-automatic method for segmenting carotid lumen and plaque from three-dimensional vascular ultrasound (US) images has been developed. We examine its ability to distinguish changes in carotid vessel and plaque surface morphology, such as those caused by plaque ulceration. Two stenosed vessel phantoms were imaged using a 3D US imaging system. The phantoms were identical except for the inclusion of a hemispherical cut in the side of one of the vessels, in order to simulate the development of an ulceration. Ultrasound images of the phantoms were segmented using our algorithm, then the resulting surfaces were registered to one another using a rigid-body iterative closest point (ICP) algorithm. The volume of ulceration was determined by finding the difference between the two segmented surfaces in a region of interest surrounding the ulceration. Since the true volume of the ulceration was known a priori, an optimization strategy was used to tune the deformable model to better segment the ulceration. Analysis of ulceration volume as a function of the deformable model's parameters show that 1) large ulcerations are easily identified in our test case, and 2) the model is well behaved with respect to its parameters, suggesting that an automatic strategy for volumetric optimization is feasible.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE→Same topicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases→French-language works237,207→