Reference standard space hippocampus labels according to the European Alzheimer's Disease Consortium–Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative harmonized protocol: Utility in automated volumetry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: A harmonized protocol (HarP) for manual hippocampal segmentation on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has recently been developed by an international European Alzheimer's Disease Consortium-Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative project. We aimed at providing consensual certified HarP hippocampal labels in Montreal Neurological Institute (MNI) standard space to serve as reference in automated image analyses. METHODS: Manual HarP tracings on the high-resolution MNI152 standard space template of four expert certified HarP tracers were combined to obtain consensual bilateral hippocampus labels. Utility and validity of these reference labels is demonstrated in a simple atlas-based morphometry approach for automated calculation of HarP-compliant hippocampal volumes within SPM software. RESULTS: = 0.89/0.91) with gold standard volumes in the HarP benchmark data set (N = 135 MRIs), with a mean volume difference of 9% (standard deviation 7%). CONCLUSION: The consensual HarP hippocampus labels in the MNI152 template can serve as a reference standard for automated image analyses involving MNI standard space normalization.
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 | 0.034 | 0.054 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".