Segmentation Method for Magnetic Resonance-Guided High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound Therapy Planning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) is a minimally invasive therapy modality in which ultrasound beams are concentrated at a focal region, producing a rise of temperature and selective ablation within the focal volume and leaving surrounding tissues intact. HIFU has been proposed for the safe ablation of both malignant and benign tissues and as an agent for drug delivery. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been proposed as guidance and monitoring method for the therapy. The identification of regions of interest is a crucial procedure in HIFU therapy planning. This procedure is performed in the MR images. The purpose of the present research work is to implement a time-efficient and functional segmentation scheme, based on the watershed segmentation algorithm, for the MR images used for the HIFU therapy planning. The achievement of a segmentation process with functional results is feasible, but preliminary image processing steps are required in order to define the markers for the segmentation algorithm. Moreover, the segmentation scheme is applied in parallel to an MR image data set through the use of a thread pool, achieving a near real-time execution and making a contribution to solve the time-consuming problem of the HIFU therapy planning.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".