MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037972318 · doi:10.1109/tbme.2011.2181167

Robust White Matter Lesion Segmentation in FLAIR MRI

2011· article· en· W2037972318 on OpenAlexaff
April Khademi, A. Venetsanopoulos, Alan R. Moody

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreToronto Metropolitan UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFluid-attenuated inversion recoveryVoxelSegmentationArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceHyperintensityArtifact (error)Pattern recognition (psychology)Ground truthImage segmentationWhite matterThresholdingPartial volumeComputer visionMagnetic resonance imagingMedicineRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper discusses a white matter lesion (WML) segmentation scheme for fluid attenuation inversion recovery (FLAIR) MRI. The method computes the volume of lesions with subvoxel precision by accounting for the partial volume averaging (PVA) artifact. As WMLs are related to stroke and carotid disease, accurate volume measurements are most important. Manual volume computation is laborious, subjective, time consuming, and error prone. Automated methods are a nice alternative since they quantify WML volumes in an objective, efficient, and reliable manner. PVA is initially modeled with a localized edge strength measure since PVA resides in the boundaries between tissues. This map is computed in 3-D and is transformed to a global representation to increase robustness to noise. Significant edges correspond to PVA voxels, which are used to find the PVA fraction α (amount of each tissue present in mixture voxels). Results on simulated and real FLAIR images show high WML segmentation performance compared to ground truth (98.9% and 83% overlap, respectively), which outperforms other methods. Lesion load studies are included that automatically analyze WML volumes for each brain hemisphere separately. This technique does not require any distributional assumptions/parameters or training samples and is applied on a single MR modality, which is a major advantage compared to the traditional methods.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.882
Threshold uncertainty score0.464

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.220 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations58
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical EngineeringSame topicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207