Discovery radiomics via evolutionary deep radiomic sequencer discovery for pathologically proven lung cancer detection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While lung cancer is the second most diagnosed form of cancer in men and women, a sufficiently early diagnosis can be pivotal in patient survival rates. Imaging-based, or radiomics-driven, detection methods have been developed to aid diagnosticians, but largely rely on hand-crafted features that may not fully encapsulate the differences between cancerous and healthy tissue. Recently, the concept of discovery radiomics was introduced, where custom abstract features are discovered from readily available imaging data. We propose an evolutionary deep radiomic sequencer discovery approach based on evolutionary deep intelligence. Motivated by patient privacy concerns and the idea of operational artificial intelligence, the evolutionary deep radiomic sequencer discovery approach organically evolves increasingly more efficient deep radiomic sequencers that produce significantly more compact yet similarly descriptive radiomic sequences over multiple generations. As a result, this framework improves operational efficiency and enables diagnosis to be run locally at the radiologist's computer while maintaining detection accuracy. We evaluated the evolved deep radiomic sequencer (EDRS) discovered via the proposed evolutionary deep radiomic sequencer discovery framework against state-of-the-art radiomics-driven and discovery radiomics methods using clinical lung CT data with pathologically proven diagnostic data from the LIDC-IDRI dataset. The EDRS shows improved sensitivity (93.42%), specificity (82.39%), and diagnostic accuracy (88.78%) relative to previous radiomics approaches.
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 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".