MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090475106 · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/57/15/4905

Tracking the motion trajectories of junction structures in 4D CT images of the lung

2012· article· en· W2090475106 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Guanglei Xiong, Chuangzhen Chen, Jianzhou Chen, Yaoqin Xie, Lei Xing

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMedical Image Segmentation Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Research Council Canada
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer visionComputer scienceTrajectoryTracking (education)Maxima and minimaVoxelMetric (unit)Image registrationMotion estimationPattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsImage (mathematics)Physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Respiratory motion poses a major challenge in lung radiotherapy. Based on 4D CT images, a variety of intensity-based deformable registration techniques have been proposed to study the pulmonary motion. However, the accuracy achievable with these approaches can be sub-optimal because the deformation is defined globally in space. Therefore, the accuracy of the alignment of local structures may be compromised. In this work, we propose a novel method to detect a large collection of natural junction structures in the lung and use them as the reliable markers to track the lung motion. Specifically, detection of the junction centers and sizes is achieved by analysis of local shape profiles on one segmented image. To track the temporal trajectory of a junction, the image intensities within a small region of interest surrounding the center are selected as its signature. Under the assumption of the cyclic motion, we describe the trajectory by a closed B-spline curve and search for the control points by maximizing a metric of combined correlation coefficients. Local extrema are suppressed by improving the initial conditions using random walks from pair-wise optimizations. Several descriptors are introduced to analyze the motion trajectories. Our method was applied to 13 real 4D CT images. More than 700 junctions in each case are detected with an average positive predictive value of greater than 90%. The average tracking error between automated and manual tracking is sub-voxel and smaller than the published results using the same set of data.

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 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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.581
Threshold uncertainty score0.126

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.392
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations17
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and BiologySame topicMedical Image Segmentation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207