MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794115412 · doi:10.1117/12.2282949

Automated intraretinal layer segmentation of optical coherence tomography images using graph-theoretical methods

2018· article· en· W2794115412 on OpenAlexaff
Priyanka Roy, Vasudevan Lakshminarayanan, Mohana Kuppuswamy Parthasarathy, John Zelek, Peyman Gholami

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOptical coherence tomographyComputer scienceSegmentationImage segmentationOptical tomographyArtificial intelligenceComputer visionTomographyGraphCoherence (philosophical gambling strategy)OpticsIterative reconstructionPhysicsTheoretical computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Segmentation of spectral-domain Optical Coherence Tomography (SD-OCT) images facilitates visualization and quantification of sub-retinal layers for diagnosis of retinal pathologies. However, manual segmentation is subjective, expertise dependent, and time-consuming, which limits applicability of SD-OCT. Efforts are therefore being made to implement active-contours, artificial intelligence, and graph-search to automatically segment retinal layers with accuracy comparable to that of manual segmentation, to ease clinical decision-making. Although, low optical contrast, heavy speckle noise, and pathologies pose challenges to automated segmentation. Graph-based image segmentation approach stands out from the rest because of its ability to minimize the cost function while maximising the flow. This study has developed and implemented a shortest-path based graph-search algorithm for automated intraretinal layer segmentation of SD-OCT images. The algorithm estimates the minimal-weight path between two graph-nodes based on their gradients. Boundary position indices (BPI) are computed from the transition between pixel intensities. The mean difference between BPIs of two consecutive layers quantify individual layer thicknesses, which shows statistically insignificant differences when compared to a previous study [for overall retina: p = 0.17, for individual layers: p > 0.05 (except one layer: p = 0.04)]. These results substantiate the accurate delineation of seven intraretinal boundaries in SD-OCT images by this algorithm, with a mean computation time of 0.93 seconds (64-bit Windows10, core i5, 8GB RAM). Besides being self-reliant for denoising, the algorithm is further computationally optimized to restrict segmentation within the user defined region-of-interest. The efficiency and reliability of this algorithm, even in noisy image conditions, makes it clinically applicable.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.107
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.369 · 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.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRetinal Imaging and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207