MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2698380058 · doi:10.1109/isbi.2017.7950737

Direct aneurysm volume estimation by multi-view semi-supervised manifold learning

2017· article· en· W2698380058 on OpenAlexaff
Liansheng Wang, Shusheng Li, Yiping Chen, Changhua Liu, Xiantong Zeng, Shuo Li

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceDiscriminative modelComputer scienceGround truthVolume (thermodynamics)SegmentationRepresentation (politics)Pattern recognition (psychology)EstimationAneurysmManifold (fluid mechanics)Random forestImage segmentationComputer visionMachine learningRadiologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate volume estimation of left atrial aneurysm plays an essential role in the early diagnosis and therapy planning. However, it is a challenging task due to huge shape variabilities of aneurysms and great appearance variations of images, which tends to be intractable for segmentation methods. In this paper, we propose a novel estimation method for direct estimation of atrial aneurysm volumes without segmentation. To handle the high variabilities and variations, we propose a new multi-view semi-supervised manifold learning (MSML) algorithm, which fuses multiple complementary features to generate compact, informative and discriminative aneurysm image representation by leveraging both labeled and unlabeled data. Based on the obtained image representation, we adopt random regression forests to conduct direct volume estimation. Our method for the first time achieves a fully automatic estimation of left atrial aneurysm volumes. Experiments on a clinical dataset of 67 subjects with a total of 1220 images show that our method achieves a high correlation co-efficient of 0.91 with ground truth manually labelled by clinical experts and largely outperforms other methods, which demonstrates the effectiveness for aneurysm volume estimation and indicates its potential use in clinical practise.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.908
Threshold uncertainty score0.493

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRetinal Imaging and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207