MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2950314391 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1807.10972

RS-Net: Regression-Segmentation 3D CNN for Synthesis of Full Resolution Missing Brain MRI in the Presence of Tumours

2018· preprint· en· W2950314391 on OpenAlexaff
Raghav Mehta, Tal Arbel

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2018
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Neural Network Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFluid-attenuated inversion recoveryComputer scienceSegmentationArtificial intelligenceVoxelDropout (neural networks)Convolutional neural networkPattern recognition (psychology)Partial volumeRegressionMagnetic resonance imagingMachine learningMathematicsStatisticsRadiologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate synthesis of a full 3D MR image containing tumours from available MRI (e.g. to replace an image that is currently unavailable or corrupted) would provide a clinician as well as downstream inference methods with important complementary information for disease analysis. In this paper, we present an end-to-end 3D convolution neural network that takes a set of acquired MR image sequences (e.g. T1, T2, T1ce) as input and concurrently performs (1) regression of the missing full resolution 3D MRI (e.g. FLAIR) and (2) segmentation of the tumour into subtypes (e.g. enhancement, core). The hypothesis is that this would focus the network to perform accurate synthesis in the area of the tumour. Experiments on the BraTS 2015 and 2017 datasets [1] show that: (1) the proposed method gives better performance than state-of-the-art methods in terms of established global evaluation metrics (e.g. PSNR), (2) replacing real MR volumes with the synthesized MRI does not lead to significant degradation in tumour and sub-structure segmentation accuracy. The system further provides uncertainty estimates based on Monte Carlo (MC) dropout [11] for the synthesized volume at each voxel, permitting quantification of the system's confidence in the output at each location.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.881
Threshold uncertainty score0.688

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.175 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicAdvanced Neural Network ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207