Segmentation of prostate contours from ultrasound images
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper presents a novel segmentation technique to extract prostate contours from transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) images. A sticks filter is first used to reduce the speckle and enhance the image contrast. The problem is then discretized by projecting equispaced radii from an arbitrary seed point inside the prostate cavity towards its boundary. The distance of the prostate boundary from the seed point is modeled by the trajectory of a moving object. The motion of this moving object is assumed to be governed by a finite set of dynamical models subject to uncertainty. Candidate edge points obtained along each radius include the measurement of the object position and some false returns. This modeling approach enables us to employ the interacting multiple model (IMM) estimator along with a probabilistic data association filter (PDAF) for prostate contour extraction. Since the method does not employ any numerical optimization, convergence is very fast. The robustness and accuracy of the method is demonstrated by segmenting contours from a series of prostate ultrasound images.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it