Automatic basal slice detection for cardiac analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Identification of the basal slice in cardiac imaging is a key step to measuring the ejection fraction of the left ventricle. Despite all the effort placed on automatic cardiac segmentation, basal slice identification is routinely performed manually. Manual identification, however, suffers from high interobserver variability. As a result, an automatic algorithm for basal slice identification is required. Guidelines published in 2013 identify the basal slice based on the percentage of myocardium surrounding the blood cavity in the short-axis view. Existing methods, however, assume that the basal slice is the first short-axis view slice below the mitral valve and are consequently at times identifying the incorrect short-axis slice. Correct identification of the basal slice under the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance guidelines is challenging due to the poor image quality and blood movement during image acquisition. This paper proposes an automatic tool that utilizes the two-chamber view to determine the basal slice while following the guidelines. To this end, an active shape model is trained to segment the two-chamber view and create temporal binary profiles from which the basal slice is identified. From the 51 tested cases, our method obtains 92% and 84% accurate basal slice detection for the end-systole and the end-diastole, respectively.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".