MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096253350 · doi:10.1109/10.991164

Feature analysis and centromere segmentation of human chromosome images using an iterative fuzzy algorithm

2002· article· en· W2096253350 on OpenAlexaff
Parvin Mousavi, Rabab Ward, Sidney Fels, M. Sameti, Peter M. Lansdorp

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicChromosomal and Genetic Variations
Canadian institutionsTerry Fox Research InstituteUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCentromereChromosomeSegmentationFuzzy logicPattern recognition (psychology)Feature (linguistics)Image segmentationComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmPixelHomologous chromosomeMathematicsBiologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Classification of homologous chromosomes is essential to advanced studies of cancer genetics. Centromere intensities are believed to be an important differentiating feature between homologs. Therefore, segmentation of centromeres is a major step toward the realization of homolog classification. This paper describes an iterative fuzzy algorithm which successfully segments centromeres from images of human chromosomes prepared using fluorescence in-situ hybridization technique. The algorithm is based on assigning a fuzzy membership value to each pixel in the centromere image. An iterative algorithm then updates and minimizes a defined error function. Chromosome 22, a highly heteromorphic chromosome, is used to verify the centromere segmentation method. Homologs of this chromosome are classified based on their segmented centromere intensities as well as their morphological differences. The classification results of these two methods agree completely and are used to validate our developed algorithm.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.638
Threshold uncertainty score0.383

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations16
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical EngineeringSame topicChromosomal and Genetic VariationsFrench-language works237,207