DRAN: Deep recurrent adversarial network for automated pancreassegmentation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Automated pancreas segmentation in abdominal computed tomography (CT) scans is of high clinical relevance (i.e. pancreas cancer diagnosis and prognosis), but extremely difficult because the pancreas is a soft, small, and flexible abdominal organ with high anatomical variability, which causes the previous segmentation methods to result in low precision. In this study, the authors present a new deep recurrent adversarial network (DRAN) to tackle this challenge. DRAN contains three steps: (i) preserving global resolution of CT scans and modifying the receptive field of kernel adaptively through a dilated convolution autoencoder module; (ii) modelling contextual spatial correlation between neighbouring CT scan patches benefits from a specially designed local long short‐term memory module; and (iii) improving the performance and generalisation by leveraging an adversarial module, which can constrain the spatial smoothness consistency between continuous CT scans based on the long‐range spatial interaction. The system is evaluated on a dataset of 80 manually segmented CT volumes, using four‐fold cross‐validation. Its performance surpasses other state‐of‐the‐art methods, with the Dice similarity coefficient of and pixel‐wise accuracy of . Also, they perform a qualitative evaluation by an expert further revealing the effectiveness and potential of their DRAN as a clinical segmentation tool.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".