Poster ‐ 32: Atlas Selection for Automated Segmentation of Pelvic CT for Prostate Radiotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Atlas based‐segmentation has recently been evaluated for use in prostate radiotherapy. In a typical approach, the essential step is the selection of an atlas from a database that the best matches of the target image. This work proposes an atlas selection strategy and evaluate it impacts on final segmentation accuracy. Several anatomical parameters were measured to indicate the overall prostate and body shape, all of these measurements obtained on CT images. A brute force procedure was first performed for a training dataset of 20 patients using image registration to pair subject with similar contours; each subject was served as a target image to which all reaming 19 images were affinity registered. The overlap between the prostate and femoral heads was quantified for each pair using the Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC). Finally, an atlas selection procedure was designed; relying on the computation of a similarity score defined as a weighted sum of differences between the target and atlas subject anatomical measurement. The algorithm ability to predict the most similar atlas was excellent, achieving mean DSCs of 0.78 ± 0.07 and 0.90 ± 0.02 for the CTV and either femoral head. The proposed atlas selection yielded 0.72 ± 0.11 and 0.87 ± 0.03 for CTV and either femoral head. The DSC obtained with the proposed selection method were slightly lower than the maximum established using brute force, but this does not include potential improvements expected with deformable registration. The proposed atlas selection method provides reasonable segmentation accuracy.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".