MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2901564411 · doi:10.5539/mas.v12n12p90

Multiscale Morphological Reconstruction for Hair Removal in Dermoscopy Images

2018· article· en· W2901564411 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
C. F. Ocampo- Blandón, E. Restrepo-Parra, Juan Rojas, Felipe Jaramillo Ayerbe

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceKernel (algebra)Pattern recognition (psychology)Computer visionDistortion (music)Gaussian functionNoise (video)Image (mathematics)GaussianMathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The automatic diagnosis of melanoma is usually affected by the noise that is often included in an image, during the acquisition stage or by superficial factors such as hair. Specifically, hair on the surface of a lesion can cause enough distortion, resulting in an erroneous diagnosis of the region of interest. To solve this issue, several techniques have been presented to detect hair on the surface of a dermoscopy image and substitute a surface approximation for these regions. Nonetheless, the existing methods are prone to false detections or reconstructions that are not uniform, demand high computing resources and modify the textures of important characteristics. Therefore, we proposed a method that detects the hairs by means of a convolution of the image with a kernel belonging to the first derivative of the Gaussian function and replaces the hairs using a multiscale morphological reconstruction. In addition, we integrated a refining stage that contributes to maintaining the quality of the patterns on the lesion. We used 36 dermoscopy images in the evaluation, which included a total of 586 hairs that were automatically detected with the proposed process and validated with their respective manual segmentations. Our results showed sensitivity and specificity performance measurements of 94.14% and 99.89%, respective.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.306
Threshold uncertainty score0.305

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern Applied ScienceSame topicCutaneous Melanoma Detection and ManagementFrench-language works237,207