MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118514093 · doi:10.1109/tbme.2011.2127476

Segmentation of Plaques in Sequences of Ultrasonic B-Mode Images of Carotid Arteries Based on Motion Estimation and a Bayesian Model

2011· article· en· W2118514093 on OpenAlexafffund
François Destrempes, Jean Meunier, Marie-France Giroux, Gilles Soulez, Guy Cloutier

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCarotid arteriesSegmentationUltrasonic imagingBayesian probabilityArtificial intelligenceMotion (physics)Motion estimationComputer visionUltrasonic sensorComputer scienceBioacousticsPattern recognition (psychology)Biomedical engineeringAcousticsRadiologyMedicinePhysicsCardiologyTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal of this work is to perform a segmentation of atherosclerotic plaques in view of evaluating their burden and to provide boundaries for computing properties such as the plaque deformation and elasticity distribution (elastogram and modulogram). The echogenicity of a region of interest comprising the plaque, the vessel lumen, and the adventitia of the artery wall in an ultrasonic B-mode image was modeled by mixtures of three Nakagami distributions, which yielded the likelihood of a Bayesian segmentation model. The main contribution of this paper is the estimation of the motion field and its integration into the prior of the Bayesian model that included a local geometrical smoothness constraint, as well as an original spatiotemporal cohesion constraint. The Maximum A Posteriori (MAP) of the proposed model was computed with a variant of the Exploration/Selection (ES) algorithm. The starting point is a manual segmentation of the first frame. The proposed method was quantitatively compared with manual segmentations of all frames by an expert technician. Various measures were used for this evaluation, including the mean point-to-point distance and the Hausdorff distance. Results were evaluated on 94 sequences of 33 patients (for a total of 8988 images). We report a mean point-to- point distance of 0.24 ± 0.08 mm and a Hausdorff distance of 1.24 ± 0.40 mm. Our tests showed that the algorithm was not sensitive to the degree of stenosis or calcification.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations100
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical EngineeringSame topicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery DiseasesFrench-language works237,207