MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2798107972 · doi:10.1109/bhi.2018.8333398

Efficient detection of mesial temporal sclerosis using hippocampus and CSF features in MRI images

2018· article· en· W2798107972 on OpenAlexaff
Huiquan Wang, S. Nizam Ahmed, Mrinal Mandai

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceHippocampal sclerosisArtificial intelligenceEpilepsyTemporal lobeSegmentationPattern recognition (psychology)Support vector machineMesial temporal lobe epilepsyFeature extractionHippocampusMagnetic resonance imagingImage segmentationComputer visionNeuroscienceRadiologyMedicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mesial temporal sclerosis (MTS) is one of the most common pathological abnormalities associated with temporal lobe epilepsy. Prompt identification of MTS can determine surgical candidacy of a medically refractory epilepsy patient thus reducing morbidity and mortality. Traditionally, MTS is detected by visual inspection or manual quantification using structural brain MRI images based on characteristics such as the volume loss, shape variance and high intensities. However, it is a subjective process with inter-observer variance. In this paper, we propose an automated detection method for MTS based on brain MRI image analysis. It includes brain and hippocampus segmentation followed by extraction of volume, shape and CSF-ratio features from the 3D hippocampal images. Support vector machines are then used for MTS detection based on the extracted features. Experimental results show that the proposed technique provides promising performance in MTS detection.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.280 · 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

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEpilepsy research and treatment→French-language works237,207→