Active contours initialization for ultrasound carotid artery images
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One of the major issues of active contouring methods is their sensitivity to the initial contour that is provided by the user. Unless it is drawn close enough to the actual contour, it may lead to unsatisfactory results. Thus, most active contour algorithms require considerable user interaction to provide a good initial contour. In this paper we present an efficient and fast rule- based algorithm for generating a good carotid artery initial contour from ultrasound images. Our algorithm reduces user interaction, as a user is only required to place a seed point inside the region of interest. Sensitivity, precision rate, and overlap ratio have been used to assess the amount of correlation between manually segmented lumens by an experienced clinician and by our algorithm, where the obtained 95% confidence interval of the mean value of these measures over all test cases are: [78.32% plusmn 1.98], [91.77% plusmn 1.96], and [72.68% plusmn 1.90], respectively. Furthermore, the output of our proposed scheme can be used as an input to any active contour algorithm to produce even better results.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".