MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166134037 · doi:10.1109/nafips.2004.1336329

A fuzzy approach to segmenting the breast region in mammograms

2004· article· en· W2166134037 on OpenAlexaff
Michael A. Wirth, Jennifer A. Lyon, D. Nikitenko

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Annual Meeting of the Fuzzy Information, 2004. Processing NAFIPS '04. · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThresholdingArtificial intelligenceSegmentationComputer sciencePixelImage segmentationPattern recognition (psychology)Computer visionFuzzy logicImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Image segmentation is a key factor in separating specific details of interest from an image. The largest single feature on a mammogram is the skin-air interface, or breast contour. Extraction of the breast contour is useful for a number of reasons. Foremost it allows the search for abnormalities to be limited to the region of the breast without undue influence from the background of the mammogram. Segmentation of the breast-region from the background is made difficult by the tapering nature of the breast, such that the breast contour lies in between the soft-tissue and the non-breast region. Segmentation techniques can be broadly categorized as fuzzy or hard (e.g. thresholding). This paper explores the application of fuzzy segmentation to the problem of extracting the breast region in mammograms. Fuzzy segmentation may be ideally suited to this task as it allows for pixel membership in more than one region.

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 score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations22
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Annual Meeting of the Fuzzy Information, 2004. Processing NAFIPS '04.Same topicAI in cancer detectionFrench-language works237,207