MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2784164715 · doi:10.1109/access.2017.2789179

Deep Regression Segmentation for Cardiac Bi-Ventricle MR Images

2018· article· en· W2784164715 on OpenAlexaff
Xiuquan Du, Weiwei Zhang, Heye Zhang, Jun Chen, Yanping Zhang, James Warrington, Gary Brahm, Shuo Li

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Anhui ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsSegmentationArtificial intelligenceVentricleComputer scienceEndocardiumFeature (linguistics)Sørensen–Dice coefficientDeep learningRegressionPattern recognition (psychology)Image segmentationMagnetic resonance imagingBoundary (topology)Regression analysisComputer visionMedicineMathematicsStatisticsRadiologyMachine learningCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cardiac bi-ventricle segmentation can help physicians to obtain clinical indices, such as mass and volume of left ventricle (LV) and right ventricle (RV). In this paper, we propose a regression segmentation framework to delineate boundaries of bi-ventricle from cardiac magnetic resonance (MR) images by building a regression model automatically and accurately. First, we extract DAISY feature from images. Then, a point based representation method is employed to depict the boundaries. Finally, we use DAISY as input and boundary points as labels to train the regression model based on deep belief network. Regression combined deep learning and DAISY feature can capture high level image information and accurately segment biventricle with fewer assumptions and lower computational cost. In our experiment, the performance of the proposed framework is compared with manual segmentation on 145 clinical subjects (2900 images in total), which are collected from three hospitals affiliated with two health care centers (London Healthcare Center and St. Josephs HealthCare). The results of our method and manually segmented method are highly consistent. High Pearson's correlation coefficient between automated boundaries and manual annotation is up to 0.995 (endocardium of LV), 0.997 (epicardium of LV), and 0.985 (RV). Average Dice metric is up to 0.916 (endocardium of LV), 0.941 (epicardium of LV), and 0.844 (RV). Altogether, experimental results are capable of demonstrating the efficacy of our regression segmentation framework for cardiac MR images.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.283
Threshold uncertainty score0.354

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.389 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations53
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicCardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207