MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139631152 · doi:10.1109/ultsym.2007.627

P6C-7 Ultrasound RF Time Series for Detection of Prostate Cancer: Feature Selection and Frame Rate Analysis

2007· article· en· W2139631152 on OpenAlexaff
Mehdi Moradi, Purang Abolmaesumi, Robert Siemens, Eric E. Sauerbrei, Phillip A. Isotalo, Alisdair M. Boag, Parvin Mousavi

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings/Proceedings - IEEE Ultrasonics Symposium · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSpectroscopy and Chemometric Analyses
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRadio frequencyArtificial intelligenceProstate cancerPattern recognition (psychology)Feature (linguistics)Frame rateFrame (networking)UltrasoundFeature selectionSeries (stratigraphy)Ultrasonic sensorEcho (communications protocol)CancerComputer visionMedicineRadiologyTelecommunicationsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper provides the recent results of in-vitro clinical studies to evaluate the performance of a tissue typing method, based on ultrasound RF time series, for detection of prostate cancer. In our approach, we continuously record RF echo signals backscattered from tissue, while the imaging probe and the tissue are stationary in position. The continuously recorded frames generate a time series of echo values for each spatial sample of RF signals. We extract the fractal dimension, and six spectral features from the RF time series and use them with neural networks for tissue typing. We analyze the performance of this method in detecting prostate cancer in 16 patients and demonstrate that a subset of five parameters selected from the proposed features is optimal for the diagnosis. We also study the performance of the extracted features at various frame rates and show that 22 frames per second is sufficient for efficient cancer detection with an area under ROC curve of 0.89.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.238 · 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.

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

Citations3
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings/Proceedings - IEEE Ultrasonics SymposiumSame topicSpectroscopy and Chemometric AnalysesFrench-language works237,207