MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132240568 · doi:10.1109/wacv.2009.5403049

An interactive graph cut method for brain tumor segmentation

2009· article· en· W2132240568 on OpenAlex
Neil Birkbeck, Dana Cobzaş, Martin Jägersand, Albert Murtha, Tibor Kesztyues

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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMedical Image Segmentation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSegmentationArtificial intelligenceCutGraphImage segmentationRegularization (linguistics)Computer visionMedical imagingPattern recognition (psychology)Theoretical computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tumor segmentation from MRI data is an important but time consuming task performed manually by medical experts. Automating this process is challenging due to the high diversity in appearance of tumor tissue among different patients and, in many cases, similarity between tumor and normal tissue. We propose a semi-automatic interactive brain tumor segmentation system that incorporates 2D interactive and 3D automatic tools with the ability to adjust operator control. The provided methods are based on an energy that incorporates region statistics computed on available MRI modalities and the usual regularization term. The energy is efficiently minimized on-line using graph cut. Experiments with radiation oncologists testing the semi-automatic tool vs. a manual tool show that the proposed system improves both segmentation time and repeatability.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.795
Threshold uncertainty score0.330

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.367 · 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

Quick stats

Citations36
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMedical Image Segmentation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207