MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2798063225 · doi:10.1038/s41598-018-22251-7

A machine learning approach for automated assessment of retinal vasculature in the oxygen induced retinopathy model

2018· article· en· W2798063225 on OpenAlex
Javier Mazzaferri, Bruno Larrivée, Bertan Cakir, Przemysław Sapieha, Santiago Costantino

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalHôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHeart and Stroke Foundation of CanadaUniversité de MontréalFoundation Fighting Blindness
KeywordsComputer sciencePipeline (software)Artificial intelligenceBenchmark (surveying)Vascular networkRetinalTask (project management)Machine learningPattern recognition (psychology)MedicineOphthalmologyAnatomyProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Preclinical studies of vascular retinal diseases rely on the assessment of developmental dystrophies in the oxygen induced retinopathy rodent model. The quantification of vessel tufts and avascular regions is typically computed manually from flat mounted retinas imaged using fluorescent probes that highlight the vascular network. Such manual measurements are time-consuming and hampered by user variability and bias, thus a rapid and objective method is needed. Here, we introduce a machine learning approach to segment and characterize vascular tufts, delineate the whole vasculature network, and identify and analyze avascular regions. Our quantitative retinal vascular assessment (QuRVA) technique uses a simple machine learning method and morphological analysis to provide reliable computations of vascular density and pathological vascular tuft regions, devoid of user intervention within seconds. We demonstrate the high degree of error and variability of manual segmentations, and designed, coded, and implemented a set of algorithms to perform this task in a fully automated manner. We benchmark and validate the results of our analysis pipeline using the consensus of several manually curated segmentations using commonly used computer tools. The source code of our implementation is released under version 3 of the GNU General Public License ( https://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/fileexchange/65699-javimazzaf-qurva ).

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.

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)0.005
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 score0.963
Threshold uncertainty score0.356

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.327
Teacher spread0.299 · 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