MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2808276994 · doi:10.1016/j.jvcir.2018.06.001

Multiple disjoint dictionaries for representation of histopathology images

2018· article· en· W2808276994 on OpenAlexafffund
Shujin Zhu, Yuehua Li, Shivam Kalra, Hamid R. Tizhoosh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Visual Communication and Image Representation · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Retrieval and Classification Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaChina Scholarship Council
KeywordsPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceHistogramBag-of-words modelComputer scienceHistogram of oriented gradientsBag-of-words model in computer visionSupport vector machineRepresentation (politics)Intersection (aeronautics)Image (mathematics)Image retrievalMathematicsVisual Word

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the availability of whole-slide imaging in pathology, high-resolution images offer a more convenient disease observation but also require content-based retrieval of large scans. The bag-of-visual-words methodology has shown a high ability to describe the image content for recognition and retrieval purposes. In this work, a variant of the bag-of-visual-words with multiple dictionaries for histopathology image classification is proposed and tested on the image dataset Kimia Path24 with more than 27,000 patches of size 1000 × 1000 belonging to 24 different classes. Features are extracted from patches and clustered to form multiple codebooks. The histogram intersection approach and support vector machines are exploited to build multiple classifiers. At last, the majority voting determines the final classification for each patch. The experiments demonstrate the superiority of the proposed method for histopathology images that surpasses deep networks, LBP and other BoW results.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.335 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations18
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Visual Communication and Image RepresentationSame topicImage Retrieval and Classification TechniquesFrench-language works237,207