MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061553978 · doi:10.1109/isbi.2010.5490091

Semi-supervised prostate cancer segmentation with multispectral MRI

2010· article· en· W2061553978 on OpenAlexaff
Yusuf Artan, Masoom A. Haider, Deanne L. Langer, İmam Şamil Yetik

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMedical Image Segmentation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultispectral imageProstate cancerMagnetic resonance imagingSegmentationComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceComputer visionProstateUltrasoundImage segmentationCancer detectionCancerRadiologyMedicinePattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prostate cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer related death for men in the United States. Recently, multispectral magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has emerged as a promising noninvasive method for the localization of prostate cancer alternative to transrectal ultrasound (TRUS). This paper develops a semi-supervised method for prostate cancer localization using multispectral MRI. Patient-specific contrast can be utilized in this method for improved performance. We also propose to use an anisotropic filtering scheme to suppress the noise in the images. Using multispectral MR images, we demonstrate the effectiveness of this algorithm by testing it on real data sets and compare it to the results of a fully-automated method as well as to the earlier results. Both visual and quantitative comparisons are provided, illustrating the success of the proposed method.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations15
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMedical Image Segmentation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207