MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2761423763 · doi:10.1109/ssci.2017.8280803

Learning autoencoded radon projections

2017· preprint· en· W2761423763 on OpenAlexaff
Aditya Sriram, Shivam Kalra, Hamid R. Tizhoosh, Shahryar Rahnamayan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutoencoderArtificial intelligenceComputer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)RadonHistogram of oriented gradientsPerceptronDeep learningCurse of dimensionalityHistogramEncoding (memory)Artificial neural networkImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Autoencoders have been recently used for encoding medical images. In this study, we design and validate a new framework for retrieving medical images by classifying Radon projections, compressed in the deepest layer of an autoencoder. As the autoencoder reduces the dimensionality, a multilayer perceptron (MLP) can be employed to classify the images. The integration of MLP promotes a rather shallow learning architecture which makes the training faster. We conducted a comparative study to examine the capabilities of autoencoders for different inputs such as raw images, Histogram of Oriented Gradients (HOG) and normalized Radon projections. Our framework is benchmarked on IRMA dataset containing 14,410 x-ray images distributed across 57 different classes. Experiments show an IRMA error of 313 (equivalent to ≈ 82% accuracy) outperforming state-of-the-art works on retrieval from IRMA dataset using autoencoders.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAI in cancer detectionFrench-language works237,207