MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2117684737 · doi:10.1109/isbi.2011.5872349

Coupled level set approach to segment carotid arteries from 3D ultrasound images

2011· article· en· W2117684737 on OpenAlexaff
Eranga Ukwatta, Joseph Awad, Aaron D. Ward, Daniel Buchanan, Grace Párraga, Aaron Fenster

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBoundary (topology)Level set (data structures)SegmentationComputer visionUltrasoundComputationImage segmentationArtificial intelligenceComputer science3D ultrasoundEnergy (signal processing)Lumen (anatomy)Transverse planeMathematicsAlgorithmPattern recognition (psychology)PhysicsMathematical analysisAnatomyAcousticsMedicineStatisticsSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we described and validated a semi-automated algorithm based on the level set method to segment the media-adventitia boundary (MAB) and lumen-intima boundary (LIB) of the carotid arteries from 3D ultrasound (3DUS) images to support the computation of carotid vessel wall volume (VWV). We incorporated local region-based and edge-based energies for the MAB segmentation, and both local and global region-based energies for the LIB segmentation. The two level set functions are coupled using a boundary separation-based energy to encourage an anatomically-motivated boundary separation between the MAB and LIB. An additional energy term attracts the boundary to pass through anchor points placed by an operator. The algorithm was evaluated with 231 2D transverse images extracted from 21 3DUS images. The algorithm gave a VWV error of 5.2%±3.9%, yielded Dice coefficients of 95.6% ± 1.5%, 92.8% ± 3.2% for the MAB and LIB, respectively, and gave sub-millimeter boundary distance errors. The coefficients of variation of VWV from the semi-automated (5.0%) and manual (3.9%) methods were not significantly different.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.201 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations15
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery DiseasesFrench-language works237,207