MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164488868 · doi:10.1109/icbbe.2008.906

A Hybrid Fuzzy Based Algorithm for 3D Human Airway Segmentation

2008· article· en· W2164488868 on OpenAlexaff
Fereshteh Yousefirizi, Alireza Ahmadian, Nima Sahba, Vahid Tavakoli, Javad Alirezaie, Emad Fatemizadeh, Nader Rezaie

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMedical Image Segmentation Techniques
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSegmentationComputer scienceVoxelArtificial intelligenceImage segmentationFuzzy logicRegion growingComputer visionScale-space segmentationSegmentation-based object categorizationProcess (computing)Pattern recognition (psychology)Data miningAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Segmentation of the human airway tree from volumetric computed tomography images is an important stage for many clinical applications such as virtual bronchoscopy. The main challenges of previously developed methods are to deal with two problems namely, leaking into the surrounding lung parenchyma during segmentation and the need to manually adjust the parameters. To overcome these problems, a multi- seeded fuzzy based region growing approach in conjunction with the spatial information of voxels is proposed. Comparison with a commonly used region growing segmentation algorithm shows that the proposed method retrieves more accurate results by achieving the specificity and sensitivity of 98.81% and 85.18%, respectively. The proposed algorithm needs no manually adjustment of parameters as well as any pre-filtering process, while leading to deliver the clinically accepted segmentation result with no leakage.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Citations4
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMedical Image Segmentation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207