Automatic ROI Placement in the Upper Trapezius Muscle in B-mode Ultrasound Images
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research involving B-mode ultrasound imaging often requires user defined regions of interest (ROIs) for analysis, traditionally drawn/selected by a trained operator. This manual process is incredibly time consuming and subjective. Here, we propose a fast and simple method of detecting the average location of aponeurosis layers in ultrasound images of the upper trapezius to place a rectangular ROI for quantitative image analysis. A total of 56 B-mode ultrasound images were analyzed, where rectangular ROIs were manually placed in the skeletal muscle by two trained operators. Interoperator agreement was determined between the ROI border locations using intercorrelation coefficient (ICC). Next, our automatic algorithm was applied (image thresholding, binary masking, and pixel intensity peak detection), estimating the mean position of both aponeurosis layers for rectangular ROI placement. The automatic estimation method was compared with the manual (visual) method by various statistics ( t test, linear correlation, Bland-Altman plot). The performance was also evaluated under additive noise conditions (Speckle). Finally, agreement of the overlapping ROI area between the manual and automatic methods was also computed. Performance of the automatic method compared with manual placement was excellent for both the superficial and deep ROI borders, performing consistently even with additive noise (error <0.674 ± 1.69 mm). Manual measurements indicated excellent consensus (ICC = 0.902) between operators. The overlapping area between the manual and automatic measurements demonstrated good agreement (90.65 ± 11.3%). With constraints, our method is robust even under large levels of noise addition making the automatic algorithm an acceptable replacement for manual ROI placement in the upper trapezius.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".