3D variational brain tumor segmentation on a clustered feature set
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tumor segmentation from MRI data is a particularly challenging and time consuming task. Tumors have a large diversity in shape and appearance with intensities overlapping the normal brain tissues. In addition, an expanding tumor can also deflect and deform nearby tissue. Our work addresses these last two difficult problems. We use the available MRI modalities (T1, T1c, T2) and their texture characteristics to construct a multi-dimensional feature set. Further, we extract clusters which provide a compact representation of the essential information in these features. The main idea in this paper is to incorporate these clustered features into the 3D variational segmentation framework. In contrast to the previous variational approaches, we propose a segmentation method that evolves the contour in a supervised fashion. The segmentation boundary is driven by the learned inside and outside region voxel probabilities in the cluster space. We incorporate prior knowledge about the normal brain tissue appearance, during the estimation of these region statistics. In particular, we use a Dirichlet prior that discourages the clusters in the ventricles to be in the tumor and hence better disambiguate the tumor from brain tissue. We show the performance of our method on real MRI scans. The experimental dataset includes MRI scans, from patients with difficult instances, with tumors that are inhomogeneous in appearance, small in size and in proximity to the major structures in the brain. Our method shows good results on these test cases.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".