Automatic classification of dental artifact status for efficient image veracity checks: effects of image resolution and convolutional neural network depth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Enabling automated pipelines, image analysis and big data methodology in cancer clinics requires thorough understanding of the data. Automated quality assurance steps could improve the efficiency and robustness of these methods by verifying possible data biases. In particular, in head and neck (H&N) computed-tomography (CT) images, dental artifacts (DA) obscure visualization of structures and the accuracy of Hounsfield units; a challenge for image analysis tasks, including radiomics, where poor image quality can lead to systemic biases. In this work we analyze the performance of three-dimensional convolutional neural networks (CNN) trained to classify DA statuses. 1538 patient images were scored by a single observer as DA positive or negative. Stratified five-fold cross validation was performed to train and test CNNs using various isotropic resampling grids (64 3 , 128 3 and 256 3 ), with CNN depths designed to produce 32 3 , 16 3 , and 8 3 machine generated features. These parameters were selected to determine if more computationally efficient CNNs could be utilized to achieve the same performance. The area under the precision recall curve (PR-AUC) was used to assess CNN performance. The highest PR-AUC (0.92 ± 0.03) was achieved with a CNN depth = 5, resampling grid = 256. The CNN performance with 256 3 resampling grid size is not significantly better than 64 3 and 128 3 after 20 epochs, which had PR-AUC = 0.89 ± 0.03 ( p -value = 0.28) and 0.91 ± 0.02 ( p -value = 0.93) at depths of 3 and 4, respectively. Our experiments demonstrate the potential to automate specific quality assurance tasks required for unbiased and robust automated pipeline and image analysis research. Additionally, we determined that there is an opportunity to simplify CNNs with smaller resampling grids to make the process more amenable to very large datasets that will be available in the future.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".