MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2203594268 · doi:10.1109/jbhi.2018.2835405

Learning to Detect Blue–White Structures in Dermoscopy Images With Weak Supervision

2018· preprint· en· W2203594268 on OpenAlexaff
Ali Madooei, Mark S. Drew, Hossein Hajimirsadeghi

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics · 2018
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceScope (computer science)Feature (linguistics)Image (mathematics)Pattern recognition (psychology)Identification (biology)Skin lesionComputer visionDermatologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a novel approach to identify one of the most significant dermoscopic criteria in the diagnosis of cutaneous Melanoma: the blue-white structure (BWS). In this paper, we achieve this goal in a multiple instance learning (MIL) framework using only image-level labels indicating whether the feature is present or not. To this aim, each image is represented as a bag of (nonoverlapping) regions, where each region may or may not be identified as an instance of BWS. A probabilistic graphical model is trained (in MIL fashion) to predict the bag (image) labels. As output, we predict the classification label for the image (i.e., the presence or absence of BWS in each image) and we also localize the feature in the image. Experiments are conducted on a challenging dataset with results outperforming state-of-the-art techniques, with BWS detection besting competing methods in terms of performance. This study provides an improvement on the scope of modeling for computerized image analysis of skin lesions. In particular, it propounds a framework for identification of dermoscopic local features from weakly labeled data.

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)0.003
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.296 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health InformaticsSame topicCutaneous Melanoma Detection and ManagementFrench-language works237,207