COMPUTER-AIDED DETECTION OF ACINAR SHADOWS IN CHEST RADIOGRAPHS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the technological advances in medical diagnosis, accurate detection of infectious tuberculosis (TB) still poses challenges due to complex image features and thus infectious TB continues to be a public health problem of global proportions. Currently, the detection of TB is mainly conducted visually by radiologists examining chest radiographs (CXRs). To reduce the backlog of CXR examination and provide more precise quantitative assessment, computer-aided detection (CAD) systems for potential lung lesions have been increasingly adopted and commercialized for clinical practice. CADs work as supporting tools to alert radiologists on suspected features that could have easily been neglected. In this paper, an effective CAD system aimed for acinar shadow regions detection in CXRs is proposed. This system exploits textural and photometric features analysis techniques which include local binary pattern (LBP), grey level co-occurrence matrix (GLCM) and histogram of oriented gradients (HOG) to analyze target regions in CXRs. Classification of acinar shadows using Adaboost is then deployed to verify the performance of a combination of these techniques. Comparative study in different image databases shows that the proposed CAD system delivers consistent high accuracy in detecting acinar shadows.
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 | 0.001 | 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".