Segmentation of epithelium in H&E stained odontogenic cysts
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
An algorithm for the automated segmentation of epithelial tissue in digital images of histologic tissue sections of odontogenic cysts (cysts originating from residual odontogenic epithelium) is presented. The algorithm features an image standardization process that greatly reduces variation in luminance and chrominance between images due to variations in sample preparation. Segmentation of the epithelial regions of images uses an algorithm based on binary graph cuts where graph weights depend on probabilities obtained from colour histogram models of epithelium and stroma image regions. Algorithm training used a data set of 38 images of four types of odontogenic cyst and was tested using a separate data set of 35 images of the same four cyst types. The best parameters for the segmentation algorithm were determined using a response-surface optimizer. The best parameter set resulted in an overall mean (± std. dev.) sensitivity of 91.5 ± 17% and overall mean specificity of 85.1 ± 18.6% on the training set. Particularly good results were obtained for dentigerous and odontogenic keratocysts for which the mean sensitivities/specificities were 91.9 ± 6.15%/97.4 ± 2.15% and 96.1 ± 1.98%/98.7 ± 3.16%, respectively. Our method is potentially applicable to many pathological conditions in similar tissues, such as skin and mucous membranes where there is a clear microscopic distinction between epithelium and connective tissues.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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