MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2953239640 · doi:10.1002/sam.11429

Interactive volumetric segmentation for textile micro‐tomography data using wavelets and nonlocal means

2019· article· en· W2953239640 on OpenAlexaff
J. Michael L. MacNeil, Daniela Ushizima, Francesco Panerai, Nagi N. Mansour, Harold Barnard, Dilworth Y. Parkinson

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistical Analysis and Data Mining The ASA Data Science Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMedical Image Segmentation Techniques
Canadian institutionsCanadian Light Source (Canada)
FundersOffice of ScienceNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsSegmentationArtificial intelligenceVoxelPattern recognition (psychology)Computer scienceWaveletDiscriminative model

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work addresses segmentation of volumetric images of woven carbon fiber textiles from micro‐tomography data. We propose a semi‐supervised algorithm to classify carbon fibers that requires sparse input as opposed to completely labeled images. The main contributions are: (a) design of effective discriminative classifiers, for three‐dimensional textile samples, trained on wavelet features for segmentation; (b) coupling of previous step with nonlocal means as simple, efficient alternative to the Potts model; and (c) demonstration of reuse of classifier to diverse samples containing similar content. We evaluate our work by curating test sets of voxels in the absence of a complete ground truth mask. The algorithm obtains an average 0.95 F1 score on test sets and average F1 score of 0.93 on new samples. We conclude with discussion of failure cases and propose future directions toward analysis of spatiotemporal high‐resolution micro‐tomography images.

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)0.003
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.318 · 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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStatistical Analysis and Data Mining The ASA Data Science JournalSame topicMedical Image Segmentation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207