MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2144585946 · doi:10.1109/tmi.2010.2052065

A Coupled Global Registration and Segmentation Framework With Application to Magnetic Resonance Prostate Imagery

2010· article· en· W2144585946 on OpenAlexaff
Yi Gao, Romeil Sandhu, Gábor Fichtinger, Allen Tannenbaum

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMedical Image Segmentation Techniques
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNational Center for Research ResourcesNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceComputer visionSegmentationImage registrationActive shape modelImage segmentationTask (project management)Medical imagingSet (abstract data type)Pattern recognition (psychology)Image (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extracting the prostate from magnetic resonance (MR) imagery is a challenging and important task for medical image analysis and surgical planning. We present in this work a unified shape-based framework to extract the prostate from MR prostate imagery. In many cases, shape-based segmentation is a two-part problem. First, one must properly align a set of training shapes such that any variation in shape is not due to pose. Then segmentation can be performed under the constraint of the learnt shape. However, the general registration task of prostate shapes becomes increasingly difficult due to the large variations in pose and shape in the training sets, and is not readily handled through existing techniques. Thus, the contributions of this paper are twofold. We first explicitly address the registration problem by representing the shapes of a training set as point clouds. In doing so, we are able to exploit the more global aspects of registration via a certain particle filtering based scheme. In addition, once the shapes have been registered, a cost functional is designed to incorporate both the local image statistics as well as the learnt shape prior. We provide experimental results, which include several challenging clinical data sets, to highlight the algorithm's capability of robustly handling supine/prone prostate registration and the overall segmentation task.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.274
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations57
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Medical ImagingSame topicMedical Image Segmentation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207