Multi-Pass Adaptive Voting for Nuclei Detection in Histopathological Images
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nuclei detection is often a critical initial step in the development of computer aided diagnosis and prognosis schemes in the context of digital pathology images. While over the last few years, a number of nuclei detection methods have been proposed, most of these approaches make idealistic assumptions about the staining quality of the tissue. In this paper, we present a new Multi-Pass Adaptive Voting (MPAV) for nuclei detection which is specifically geared towards images with poor quality staining and noise on account of tissue preparation artifacts. The MPAV utilizes the symmetric property of nuclear boundary and adaptively selects gradient from edge fragments to perform voting for a potential nucleus location. The MPAV was evaluated in three cohorts with different staining methods: Hematoxylin &Eosin, CD31 &Hematoxylin, and Ki-67 and where most of the nuclei were unevenly and imprecisely stained. Across a total of 47 images and nearly 17,700 manually labeled nuclei serving as the ground truth, MPAV was able to achieve a superior performance, with an area under the precision-recall curve (AUC) of 0.73. Additionally, MPAV also outperformed three state-of-the-art nuclei detection methods, a single pass voting method, a multi-pass voting method, and a deep learning based method.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".