MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2089459993 · doi:10.1109/titb.2012.2199595

Automated Segmentation of the Melanocytes in Skin Histopathological Images

2013· article· en· W2089459993 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImage segmentationArtificial intelligenceSegmentationComputer scienceComputer visionPattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the diagnosis of skin melanoma by analyzing histopathological images, the detection of the melanocytes in the epidermis area is an important step. However, the detection of melanocytes in the epidermis area is dicult because other keratinocytes that are very similar to the melanocytes are also present. This paper proposes a novel computer-aided technique for segmentation of the melanocytes in the skin histopathological images. In order to reduce the local intensity variant, a mean-shift algorithm is applied for the initial segmentation of the image. A local region recursive segmentation algorithm is then proposed to filter out the candidate nuclei regions based on the domain prior knowledge. To distinguish the melanocytes from other keratinocytes in the epidermis area, a novel descriptor, named local double ellipse descriptor (LDED), is proposed to measure the local features of the candidate regions. The LDED uses two parameters: region ellipticity and local pattern characteristics to distinguish the melanocytes from the candidate nuclei regions. Experimental results on 28 dierent histopathological images of skin tissue with dierent zooming factors show that the proposed technique provides a superior performance.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.937
Threshold uncertainty score0.121

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.275 · 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