Metastatic liver tumour segmentation from discriminant Grassmannian manifolds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The early detection, diagnosis and monitoring of liver cancer progression can be achieved with the precise delineation of metastatic tumours. However, accurate automated segmentation remains challenging due to the presence of noise, inhomogeneity and the high appearance variability of malignant tissue. In this paper, we propose an unsupervised metastatic liver tumour segmentation framework using a machine learning approach based on discriminant Grassmannian manifolds which learns the appearance of tumours with respect to normal tissue. First, the framework learns within-class and between-class similarity distributions from a training set of images to discover the optimal manifold discrimination between normal and pathological tissue in the liver. Second, a conditional optimisation scheme computes non-local pairwise as well as pattern-based clique potentials from the manifold subspace to recognise regions with similar labelings and to incorporate global consistency in the segmentation process. The proposed framework was validated on a clinical database of 43 CT images from patients with metastatic liver cancer. Compared to state-of-the-art methods, our method achieves a better performance on two separate datasets of metastatic liver tumours from different clinical sites, yielding an overall mean Dice similarity coefficient of [Formula: see text] in over 50 tumours with an average volume of 27.3 mm(3).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".