MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2506778745 · doi:10.1002/jbio.201600021

<i>In‐vivo</i> multispectral video endoscopy towards <i>in‐vivo</i> hyperspectral video endoscopy

2016· article· en· W2506778745 on OpenAlexafffund
Martin Hohmann, Rajesh Kanawade, Florian Klämpfl, Alexandre Douplik, Jonas Mudter, Markus F. Neurath, Heinz Albrecht

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biophotonics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersMedizinische Fakultät, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-NürnbergErlangen Graduate School of Advanced Optical TechnologiesDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFriedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg
KeywordsMultispectral imageHyperspectral imagingEndoscopyIn vivoArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceSupport vector machineCancer detectionCancerPattern recognition (psychology)Computer visionPathologyMedical physicsRadiologyMedicineBiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For in-vivo diagnostics of cancer and pre-cancer in the stomach, there is no endoscopic procedure offering both high sensitivity and high specificity. Our data suggest that multispectral or hyperspectral imaging may be helpful to solve this problem. It is successfully applied to the detection and analysis of easily reachable carcinomas, ex-vivo samples of hollow organ mucosal carcinomas and also histological samples. An endoscopy system which allows flexible multispectral videoendoscopy for in-vivo diagnostics has so far been unavailable. To overcome this problem, we modified a standard Olympus endoscopy system to conduct in-vivo multispectral imaging of the upper GI tract. The pilot study is performed on 14 patients with adeno carcinomas in the stomach. For analysis, Support Vector Machine with linear and Gaussian Kernel, AdaBoost, RobustBoost and Random-Forest-walk are used and compared for the data classification with a leave-one-out strategy. The margin of the carcinoma for the training of the classifier is drawn by expert-labeling. The cancer findings are cross-checked by biopsies. We expect that the present study will help to improve the further development of hyperspectral endoscopy and to overcome some of the problems to be faced in this process.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations36
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of BiophotonicsSame topicColorectal Cancer Screening and DetectionFrench-language works237,207