MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067977604 · doi:10.1109/tbme.2012.2211017

Cross-Scale Coefficient Selection for Volumetric Medical Image Fusion

2012· article· en· W2067977604 on OpenAlexafffund
Rui Shen, Irene Cheng, Anup Basu

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Image Fusion Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersFaculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of AlbertaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsImage fusionComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceFusionFusion rulesSet (abstract data type)Scale (ratio)Sensor fusionMedical imagingData miningImage (mathematics)Selection (genetic algorithm)Pattern recognition (psychology)DecompositionInformation fusionComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Joint analysis of medical data collected from different imaging modalities has become a common clinical practice. Therefore, image fusion techniques, which provide an efficient way of combining and enhancing information, have drawn increasing attention from the medical community. In this paper, we propose a novel cross-scale fusion rule for multiscale-decomposition-based fusion of volumetric medical images taking into account both intrascale and interscale consistencies. An optimal set of coefficients from the multiscale representations of the source images is determined by effective exploitation of neighborhood information. An efficient color fusion scheme is also proposed. Experiments demonstrate that our fusion rule generates better results than existing rules.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations116
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical EngineeringSame topicAdvanced Image Fusion TechniquesFrench-language works237,207