Simultaneous Nonrigid Registration, Segmentation, and Tumor Detection in MRI Guided Cervical Cancer Radiation Therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
External beam radiation therapy (EBRT) for the treatment of cancer enables accurate placement of radiation dose on the cancerous region. However, the deformation of soft tissue during the course of treatment, such as in cervical cancer, presents significant challenges for the delineation of the target volume and other structures of interest. Furthermore, the presence and regression of pathologies such as tumors may violate registration constraints and cause registration errors. In this paper, automatic segmentation, nonrigid registration and tumor detection in cervical magnetic resonance (MR) data are addressed simultaneously using a unified Bayesian framework. The proposed novel method can generate a tumor probability map while progressively identifying the boundary of an organ of interest based on the achieved nonrigid transformation. The method is able to handle the challenges of significant tumor regression and its effect on surrounding tissues. The new method was compared to various currently existing algorithms on a set of 36 MR data from six patients, each patient has six T2-weighted MR cervical images. The results show that the proposed approach achieves an accuracy comparable to manual segmentation and it significantly outperforms the existing registration algorithms. In addition, the tumor detection result generated by the proposed method has a high agreement with manual delineation by a qualified clinician.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".