MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2960805141 · doi:10.1109/isbi.2019.8759280

End-To-End Vertebra Localization and Level Detection in Weakly Labelled 3D Spinal Mr using Cascaded Neural Networks

2019· article· en· W2960805141 on OpenAlexaff
Tom van Sonsbeek, Pardiss Danaei, Delaram Behnami, Mohammad H. Jafari, Parisa Asgharzadeh, Robert Rohling, Purang Abolmaesumi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMedical Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSagittal planeCentroidComputer scienceVertebraArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Artificial neural networkProcess (computing)SegmentationIdentification (biology)Computer visionAnatomyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Localization and identification of vertebrae in 3D MR volumes is a crucial first step for diagnosis and management of spinal conditions. Automating this process can save radiologists significant time and clicks. In this paper, we propose a novel learning-based approach consisting of two cascaded networks that perform simultaneous identification and localization of vertebrae. The first network performs slice-based level detection of full 3D sagittal volumes using an adaptive loss function that adjusts the weights of its loss terms during training, and outputs estimated center slices of each vertebrae. The sagittal slice is then divided into sub-volumes each containing a single vertebra. These sub-volumes are inputted into the second network for binary classification and localization of the vertebrae. Our method only requires centroid annotation (performed manually), a statistical model then provides an approximation of the volumetric segmentation for ground truth data. With this method, a vertebra identification rate of 82% was achieved.

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)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.402
Threshold uncertainty score0.402

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMedical Imaging and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207