Prostate boundary segmentation from 2D ultrasound images
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
Outlining, or segmenting, the prostate is a very important task in the assignment of appropriate therapy and dose for cancer treatment; however, manual outlining is tedious and time-consuming. In this paper, an algorithm is described for semiautomatic segmentation of the prostate from 2D ultrasound images. The algorithm uses model-based initialization and the efficient discrete dynamic contour. Initialization requires the user to select only four points from which the outline of the prostate is estimated using cubic interpolation functions and shape information. The estimated contour is then deformed automatically to better fit the image. The algorithm can easily segment a wide range of prostate images, and contour editing tools are included to handle more difficult cases. The performance of the algorithm with a single user was compared to manual outlining by a single expert observer. The average distance between semiautomatically and manually outlined boundaries was found to be less than 5 pixels (0.63 mm), and the accuracy and sensitivity to area measurements were both over 90%.
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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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