MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2548283510 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2016.7726763

Human blastocyst segmentation using neural network

2016· article· en· W2548283510 on OpenAlexaff
Shakiba Kheradmand, Parvaneh Saeedi, Ivan V. Bajić

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial neural networkDiscrete cosine transformBackpropagationJPEGArtificial intelligenceSegmentationPattern recognition (psychology)Image segmentationFeedforward neural networkComputer visionData compressionImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a new method to segment the blastocyst images in JPEG compressed domain is proposed. We exploit valuable features of a DCT transform to automate the segmentation process in a blastocyst image. A two layer feedforward backpropagation neural network is trained using the derived features of DCT coefficients of JPEG images to learn the characteristics of blastocyst different components. The precision value for the identification of ZP, TE and ICM detection in test data are 0.80, 0.69 and 0.76, while the recall values are 0.88, 0.78 and 0.87, 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.839
Threshold uncertainty score0.163

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations24
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAI in cancer detectionFrench-language works237,207