Efficient Interactive Brain Tumor Segmentation as Within-Brain kNN Classification
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
We consider the problem of brain tumor segmentation from magnetic resonance (MR) images. This task is most frequently tackled using machine learning methods that generalize across brains, by learning from training brain images in order to generalize to novel test brains. However this approach faces many obstacles that threaten its performance, such as the ability to properly perform multi-brain registration or brain-atlas alignment, or to extract appropriate high-dimensional features that support good generalization. These operations are both nontrivial and time-consuming, limiting the practicality of these approaches in a clinical context. In this paper, we propose to side step these issues by approaching the problem as one of within brain generalization. Specifically, we propose a semi-automatic method that segments a given brain by training and generalizing within that brain only, based on some minimum user interaction. We investigate how k nearest neighbors (kNN), arguably the simplest machine learning method available, combined with the simplest feature vector possible (raw MR signal + (x,y,z) position) can be combined into a method that is both simple, accurate and fast. Results obtained on the online BRATS dataset reveal that our method is fast and second best in terms of the complete and core test set tumor segmentation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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