MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150146643 · doi:10.1109/isbi.2011.5872343

Selection of optimal texture descriptors for retrieving ultrasound medical images

2011· article· en· W2150146643 on OpenAlexaff
Abu Sayeed Md. Sohail, Prabir Bhattacharya, Sudhir P. Mudur, Srinivasan Krishnamurthy

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Canadian institutionsRoyal Victoria HospitalConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSelection (genetic algorithm)Artificial intelligenceTexture (cosmology)Computer visionImage texturePattern recognition (psychology)Image (mathematics)Image segmentation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although feature selection has been proven to be very effective in machine learning and pattern classification applications, it has not been widely practiced in the area of image annotation and retrieval. This paper presents a method of selecting a near optimal to optimal subset of statistical texture descriptors in efficient representation and retrieval of ultrasound medical images. An objective function combining the concept of between-class distance and within-class divergence among the training dataset has been proposed as the evaluation criteria of optimality. Searching for the selection of optimal subset of image descriptors has been performed using Multi-Objective Genetic Algorithm (MOGA). The proposed feature selection based approach of image annotation and retrieval has been tested using a database of 679 ultrasound ovarian images and satisfactory retrieval performance has been achieved. Besides, performance of ultrasound medical image retrieval with and without applying feature selection based image annotation technique has also been compared.

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)0.003
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.323
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.288
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations14
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical ImagingFrench-language works237,207