MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2205638955 · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/60/16/6459

Metastatic liver tumour segmentation from discriminant Grassmannian manifolds

2015· article· en· W2205638955 on OpenAlexafffund
Samuel Kadoury, Eugene Vorontsov, An Tang

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustinePolytechnique Montréal
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsSegmentationArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)DiscriminantSubspace topologyGrassmannianComputer sciencePairwise comparisonCancerMathematicsMedicineCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.770
Threshold uncertainty score0.251

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.284
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.102 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations28
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and BiologySame topicAI in cancer detectionFrench-language works237,207