MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2770792541 · doi:10.1186/s12859-017-1903-6

Brain medical image diagnosis based on corners with importance-values

2017· article· en· W2770792541 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Linlin Gao, Haiwei Pan, Qing Li, Xiaoqin Xie, Zhiqiang Zhang, Jinming Han, Xiao Zhai

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Bioinformatics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMedical Image Segmentation Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute on AgingNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthServierH. Lundbeck A/SIXICONatural Science Foundation of Heilongjiang ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaEisaiGenentechNorthern California Institute for Research and EducationEli Lilly and CompanyU.S. Department of DefenseAlzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging InitiativeMeso Scale DiagnosticsF. Hoffmann-La RocheUniversity of Southern CaliforniaPfizerBiogenBioClinicaNovartis Pharmaceuticals CorporationBristol-Myers SquibbFoundation for the National Institutes of Health
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceClassifier (UML)Pattern recognition (psychology)Matching (statistics)Similarity (geometry)Image registrationImage (mathematics)Medical imagingComputer visionMedicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Brain disorders are one of the top causes of human death. Generally, neurologists analyze brain medical images for diagnosis. In the image analysis field, corners are one of the most important features, which makes corner detection and matching studies essential. However, existing corner detection studies do not consider the domain information of brain. This leads to many useless corners and the loss of significant information. Regarding corner matching, the uncertainty and structure of brain are not employed in existing methods. Moreover, most corner matching studies are used for 3D image registration. They are inapplicable for 2D brain image diagnosis because of the different mechanisms. To address these problems, we propose a novel corner-based brain medical image classification method. Specifically, we automatically extract multilayer texture images (MTIs) which embody diagnostic information from neurologists. Moreover, we present a corner matching method utilizing the uncertainty and structure of brain medical images and a bipartite graph model. Finally, we propose a similarity calculation method for diagnosis. RESULTS: Brain CT and MRI image sets are utilized to evaluate the proposed method. First, classifiers are trained in N-fold cross-validation analysis to produce the best θ and K. Then independent brain image sets are tested to evaluate the classifiers. Moreover, the classifiers are also compared with advanced brain image classification studies. For the brain CT image set, the proposed classifier outperforms the comparison methods by at least 8% on accuracy and 2.4% on F1-score. Regarding the brain MRI image set, the proposed classifier is superior to the comparison methods by more than 7.3% on accuracy and 4.9% on F1-score. Results also demonstrate that the proposed method is robust to different intensity ranges of brain medical image. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we develop a robust corner-based brain medical image classifier. Specifically, we propose a corner detection method utilizing the diagnostic information from neurologists and a corner matching method based on the uncertainty and structure of brain medical images. Additionally, we present a similarity calculation method for brain image classification. Experimental results on two brain image sets show the proposed corner-based brain medical image classifier outperforms the state-of-the-art studies.

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)0.004
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.284 · 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
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

Citations11
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC BioinformaticsSame topicMedical Image Segmentation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207