MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2905395078 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v33i01.3301809

Weakly-Supervised Simultaneous Evidence Identification and Segmentation for Automated Glaucoma Diagnosis

2019· article· en· W2905395078 on OpenAlexaff
Rongchang Zhao, Wangmin Liao, Beiji Zou, Zailiang Chen, Shuo Li

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceSegmentationGlaucomaComputer scienceDiscriminative modelPattern recognition (psychology)Optic discIdentification (biology)Fundus (uterus)PixelImage segmentationOptic cup (embryology)Computer visionMedicineOphthalmology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Evidence identification, optic disc segmentation and automated glaucoma diagnosis are the most clinically significant tasks for clinicians to assess fundus images. However, delivering the three tasks simultaneously is extremely challenging due to the high variability of fundus structure and lack of datasets with complete annotations. In this paper, we propose an innovative Weakly-Supervised Multi-Task Learning method (WSMTL) for accurate evidence identification, optic disc segmentation and automated glaucoma diagnosis. The WSMTL method only uses weak-label data with binary diagnostic labels (normal/glaucoma) for training, while obtains pixel-level segmentation mask and diagnosis for testing. The WSMTL is constituted by a skip and densely connected CNN to capture multi-scale discriminative representation of fundus structure; a well-designed pyramid integration structure to generate high-resolution evidence map for evidence identification, in which the pixels with higher value represent higher confidence to highlight the abnormalities; a constrained clustering branch for optic disc segmentation; and a fully-connected discriminator for automated glaucoma diagnosis. Experimental results show that our proposed WSMTL effectively and simultaneously delivers evidence identification, optic disc segmentation (89.6% TP Dice), and accurate glaucoma diagnosis (92.4% AUC). This endows our WSMTL a great potential for the effective clinical assessment of glaucoma.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.062
GPT teacher head0.343
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

Citations44
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicRetinal Imaging and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207