In-vivo probabilistic atlas of human thalamic nuclei based on diffusion- weighted magnetic resonance imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The thalamic nuclei are involved in many neurodegenerative diseases and therefore, their identification is of key importance in numerous clinical treatments. Automated segmentation of thalamic subparts is currently achieved by exploring diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI), but in absence of such data, atlas-based segmentation can be used as an alternative. Currently, there is a limited number of available digital atlases of the thalamus. Moreover, all atlases are created using a few subjects only, thus are prone to errors due to the inter-subject variability of the thalamic morphology. In this work, we present a probabilistic atlas of anatomical subparts of the thalamus built upon a relatively large dataset where the individual thalamic parcellation was done by employing a recently proposed automatic diffusion-based clustering method. Our analyses, comparing the segmentation performance between the atlas-based and the clustering method, demonstrate the ability of the provided atlas to substitute the automated diffusion-based subdivision in the individual space when the DW-MRI is not available.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".