MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139302418 · doi:10.1109/tmi.2009.2023515

Reproducible Classification of Infarct Heterogeneity Using Fuzzy Clustering on Multicontrast Delayed Enhancement Magnetic Resonance Images

2009· article· en· W2139302418 on OpenAlexaff
J.S. Detsky, Gideon Paul, A.J. Dick, Graham A. Wright

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceCluster analysisPattern recognition (psychology)Magnetic resonance imagingFuzzy clusteringComputer scienceFuzzy logicComputer visionMedicineRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Delayed enhancement MRI (DE-MRI) can be used to identify myocardial infarct (MI). Classification of MI into the infarct core and heterogeneous periphery (called the gray zone) on conventional inversion-recovery gradient echo (IR-GRE) DE-MRI images has been related to inducibility for ventricular tachycardia. However, this classification is sensitive to image noise, depends on the signal intensity characteristics in a remote region of myocardium, and requires manual contours of the endocardial border. Image analysis and fuzzy clustering techniques were developed to analyze images acquired using a multicontrast delayed enhancement (MCDE) sequence in order characterize the infarct zones. The MCDE analysis is automated and uses data fitting of signal intensities acquired at multiple inversion times. In a study of 15 patients with chronic MI, the gray zones derived from IR-GRE and MCDE images were comparable. The variability in the gray zone size associated with random noise and operator input was significantly reduced using the MCDE-based analysis compared to the IR-GRE-based analysis. In summary, the MCDE approach yields a more reproducible measure of the infarct core and gray zones on any given data set.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.868
Threshold uncertainty score0.717

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations50
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Medical ImagingSame topicAdvanced MRI Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207