Segmentation of Lung Lobes in High-Resolution Isotropic CT 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
Modern multislice computed tomography (CT) scanners produce isotropic CT images with a thickness of 0.6 mm. These CT images offer detailed information of lung cavities, which could be used for better surgical planning of treating lung cancer. The major challenge for developing a surgical planning system is the automatic segmentation of lung lobes by identifying the lobar fissures. This paper presents a lobe segmentation algorithm that uses a two-stage approach: 1) adaptive fissure sweeping to find fissure regions and 2) wavelet transform to identify the fissure locations and curvatures within these regions. Tested on isotropic CT image stacks from nine anonymous patients with pathological lungs, the algorithm yielded an accuracy of 76.7%-94.8% with strict evaluation criteria. In comparison, surgeons obtain an accuracy of 80% for localizing the fissure regions in clinical CT images with a thickness of 2.5-7.0 mm. As well, this paper describes a procedure for visualizing lung lobes in three dimensions using software--amira--and the segmentation algorithm. The procedure, including the segmentation, needed about 5 min for each patient. These results provide promising potential for developing an automatic algorithm to segment lung lobes for surgical planning of treating lung cancer.
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