MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080927070 · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2014.58

Iterative Multilevel MRF Leveraging Context and Voxel Information for Brain Tumour Segmentation in MRI

2014· article· en· W2080927070 on OpenAlexaff
Nagesh K. Subbanna, Doina Precup, Tal Arbel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicBrain Tumor Detection and Classification
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSegmentationArtificial intelligenceVoxelMarkov random fieldPattern recognition (psychology)Context (archaeology)Image segmentationProbabilistic logicConsistency (knowledge bases)Computer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we introduce a fully automated multistage graphical probabilistic framework to segment brain tumours from multimodal Magnetic Resonance Images (MRIs) acquired from real patients. An initial Bayesian tumour classification based on Gabor texture features permits subsequent computations to be focused on areas where the probability of tumour is deemed high. An iterative, multistage Markov Random Field (MRF) framework is then devised to classify the various tumour subclasses (e.g. edema, solid tumour, enhancing tumour and necrotic core). Specifically, an adapted, voxel-based MRF provides tumour candidates to a higher level, regional MRF, which then leverages both contextual texture information and relative spatial consistency of the tumour subclass positions to provide updated regional information down to the voxel-based MRF for further local refinement. The two stages iterate until convergence. Experiments are performed on publicly available, patient brain tumour images from the MICCAI 2012 [11] and 2013 [12] Brain Tumour Segmentation Challenges. The results demonstrate that the proposed method achieves the top performance in the segmentation of tumour cores and enhancing tumours, and performs comparably to the winners in other tumour categories.

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)0.005
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.245 · 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
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

Citations41
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBrain Tumor Detection and ClassificationFrench-language works237,207