MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122433671 · doi:10.1109/imtc.2005.1604488

Automatic Detection of Features in Ultrasound Images of the Eye

2006· article· en· W2122433671 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venue2005 IEEE Instrumentationand Measurement Technology Conference Proceedings · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceGlaucomaComputer scienceIRIS (biosensor)Computer visionUltrasoundSpeckle noiseSpeckle patternTemplate matchingCorneaPattern recognition (psychology)Image (mathematics)MedicineOphthalmologyRadiologyBiometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In closed angled glaucoma, fluid pressure in the eye increases because of inadequate fluid flow between the iris and the cornea. One important technique to assess patients at risk of glaucoma is to analyze ultrasound images of the eye to detect the structural changes. Currently, these images are analyzed manually. We propose an algorithm to automatically identify clinically important features in the ultrasound image of the eye. The main challenge is stable detection of features in the presence of ultrasound speckle noise; the algorithm addresses this using multiscale analysis and template matching. Tests were performed by comparison of results with eighty images of glaucoma patients and normals against the landmarks identified by a trained technologist. In 5% of cases, the algorithm could not analyze the images; in the remaining cases, features were correctly identified (within 97.5 mum) in 97% of images. This work shows promise as a technique to improve the efficiency of clinical interpretation of ultrasound images of the eye

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 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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.397

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.237 · 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