MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160871494 · doi:10.1109/isbi.2006.1624936

Automatic Mri Brain Tissue Segmentation Using a Hybrid Statistical and Geometric Model

2006· article· en· W2160871494 on OpenAlexaff
Albert Huang, Rafeef Abugharbieh, Roger Tam, Anthony Traboulsee

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMedical Image Segmentation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSegmentationArtificial intelligenceVoxelComputer scienceImage segmentationWhite matterComputer visionMagnetic resonance imagingPattern recognition (psychology)Brain tissueScale-space segmentationBiomedical engineeringRadiologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a novel hybrid segmentation technique incorporating a statistical as well as a geometric model in a unified segmentation scheme for brain tissue segmentation of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans. We combine both voxel probability and image gradient and curvature information for segmenting gray matter (GM) and white matter (WM) tissues. Both qualitative and quantitative results on synthetic and real brain MRI scans indicate superior and consistent performance when compared with standard techniques such as SPM and FAST

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.930
Threshold uncertainty score0.396

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.300 · 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.

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

Citations11
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMedical Image Segmentation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207