MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

On the Potential Use of Anatomical and Epidemiological Information to Enhance Microwave and Ultrasound Breast Imaging

2018· article· en· W2892823914 on OpenAlexaff
Pedram Mojabi, Joe LoVetri

Bibliographic record

Venue2018 2nd URSI Atlantic Radio Science Meeting (AT-RASC) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrowave Imaging and Scattering Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPixelComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMicrowave imagingBayes' theoremComputer visionStatistical modelIterative reconstructionPattern recognition (psychology)Breast cancerData miningMedicineMicrowaveCancerBayesian probability

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes the use of available anatomical and epidemiological (statistical) information regarding breast cancer in conjunction with microwave and ultrasound breast imaging. This information, which can be extracted from the broader medical research effort, can be used in conjunction with image reconstruction algorithms to further guide those algorithms towards a more accurate solution. In particular, we propose to consider the following anatomical and statistical information into the image reconstruction process via the tissue-type framework. Anatomical information is utilized in assigning a tissue-type and its corresponding probability to a given pixel by considering the neighbouring reconstructed pixels (epidemiological information related to the anatomical surroundings of the pixel is used to modify the prior probabilities in the Bayes prediction model). Two types of epidemiological information are used in reconstructing the tissue-type image to improve the discrimination between tumor and cyst: the quadrant of the breast within which a pixel is located provides statistical information regrading whether of being cancerous, and the age of the patient can provide similar information.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.698
Threshold uncertainty score0.627

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2018 2nd URSI Atlantic Radio Science Meeting (AT-RASC)Same topicMicrowave Imaging and Scattering AnalysisFrench-language works237,207