MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088213672 · doi:10.1155/2013/345968

Ultrasound Common Carotid Artery Segmentation Based on Active Shape Model

2013· article· en· W2088213672 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Xin Yang, Jiaoying Jin, Mengling Xu, Huihui Wu, Wanji He, Ming Yuchi, Mingyue Ding

Bibliographic record

VenueComputational and Mathematical Methods in Medicine · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersXidian UniversitySpecialized Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education of ChinaRobarts Research InstituteHuazhong University of Science and TechnologyNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMedicineSegmentationCommon carotid arteryUltrasoundStenosisStroke (engine)Ground truth3D ultrasoundCarotid arteriesRadiologyArtificial intelligenceCardiologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Carotid atherosclerosis is a major reason of stroke, a leading cause of death and disability. In this paper, a segmentation method based on Active Shape Model (ASM) is developed and evaluated to outline common carotid artery (CCA) for carotid atherosclerosis computer-aided evaluation and diagnosis. The proposed method is used to segment both media-adventitia-boundary (MAB) and lumen-intima-boundary (LIB) on transverse views slices from three-dimensional ultrasound (3D US) images. The data set consists of sixty-eight, 17 × 2 × 2, 3D US volume data acquired from the left and right carotid arteries of seventeen patients (eight treated with 80 mg atorvastatin and nine with placebo), who had carotid stenosis of 60% or more, at baseline and after three months of treatment. Manually outlined boundaries by expert are adopted as the ground truth for evaluation. For the MAB and LIB segmentations, respectively, the algorithm yielded Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC) of 94.4% ± 3.2% and 92.8% ± 3.3%, mean absolute distances (MAD) of 0.26 ± 0.18 mm and 0.33 ± 0.21 mm, and maximum absolute distances (MAXD) of 0.75 ± 0.46 mm and 0.84 ± 0.39 mm. It took 4.3 ± 0.5 mins to segment single 3D US images, while it took 11.7 ± 1.2 mins for manual segmentation. The method would promote the translation of carotid 3D US to clinical care for the monitoring of the atherosclerotic disease progression and regression.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.335 · 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

Citations35
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputational and Mathematical Methods in MedicineSame topicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery DiseasesFrench-language works237,207