Functional segmentation of dynamic PET studies: Open source implementation and validation of a leader-follower-based algorithm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: We present a novel segmentation algorithm for dynamic PET studies that groups pixels according to the similarity of their time-activity curves. METHODS: Sixteen mice bearing a human tumor cell line xenograft (CH-157MN) were imaged with three different (68)Ga-DOTA-peptides (DOTANOC, DOTATATE, DOTATOC) using a small animal PET-CT scanner. Regional activities (input function and tumor) were obtained after manual delineation of regions of interest over the image. The algorithm was implemented under the jClustering framework and used to extract the same regional activities as in the manual approach. The volume of distribution in the tumor was computed using the Logan linear method. A Kruskal-Wallis test was used to investigate significant differences between the manually and automatically obtained volumes of distribution. RESULTS: The algorithm successfully segmented all the studies. No significant differences were found for the same tracer across different segmentation methods. Manual delineation revealed significant differences between DOTANOC and the other two tracers (DOTANOC - DOTATATE, p=0.020; DOTANOC - DOTATOC, p=0.033). Similar differences were found using the leader-follower algorithm. CONCLUSION: An open implementation of a novel segmentation method for dynamic PET studies is presented and validated in rodent studies. It successfully replicated the manual results obtained in small-animal studies, thus making it a reliable substitute for this task and, potentially, for other dynamic segmentation procedures.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
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".