MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145299899 · doi:10.1109/ssst.1991.138516

Medical radiograph classification by pattern recognition

2002· article· en· W2145299899 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Daqi Zhu, Richard W. Conners, Colin B. Carrig, William S. Swecker

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Retrieval and Classification Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPuppySkeleton (computer programming)Appendicular skeletonDysplasiaRadiographyComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceAnatomyPathologyMedicinePattern recognition (psychology)Computational biologyBiologyRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Labrador retrievers can be affected by a syndrome that is characterized by ocular and skeletal dysplasia. The skeletal dysplasia takes the form of bone lesions that are confined to the appendicular skeleton. These lesions are characterized by shortened and abnormally shaped bones, and abnormal joint morphology. Elimination of the abnormal gene from the breed would require the identification of carrier animals by test mating with an affected animal. A method for reliably identifying affected puppies in resulting litters is to use the consistently expressed skeletal changes to make the diagnosis. The paper reports the research aimed at automating this diagnostic task. The procedures presented use hand digitized bone outline data obtained from a radiograph and compare this outline to known but 'fuzzy' shape characteristics of normal and abnormal bones. Experiments using this automated diagnostic method on thirty-one puppy bone radiographs yielded very good classification accuracies.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">&gt;</ETX>

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage Retrieval and Classification TechniquesFrench-language works237,207