MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3003812940 · doi:10.1101/2020.01.29.924985

Convolutional neural network MRI segmentation for fast and robust optimization of transcranial electrical current stimulation of the human brain

2020· preprint· en· W3003812940 on OpenAlexaff
Carla Sendra-Balcells, Ricardo Salvador, Juan Pedro, Maria Chiara Biagi, Charlène Aubinet, Brad Manor, Aurore Thibaut, Steven Laureys, Karim Lekadir, Giulio Ruffini

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
FundersEuropean CommissionNational Institutes of HealthAlzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging InitiativeU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsSegmentationSørensen–Dice coefficientComputer scienceConvolutional neural networkArtificial intelligenceWhite matterPattern recognition (psychology)ResidualEncoderComputer visionImage segmentationMagnetic resonance imagingAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The segmentation of structural MRI data is an essential step for deriving geometrical information about brain tissues. One important application is in transcranial electrical stimulation (e.g., tDCS), a non-invasive neuromodulatory technique where head modeling is required to determine the electric field (E-field) generated in the cortex to predict and optimize its effects. Here we propose a deep learning-based model ( StarNEt ) to automatize white matter (WM) and gray matter (GM) segmentation and compare its performance with FreeSurfer , an established tool. Since good definition of sulci and gyri in the cortical surface is an important requirement for E-field calculation, StarNEt is specifically designed to output masks at a higher resolution than that of the original input T1w-MRI. StarNEt uses a residual network as the encoder (ResNet) and a fully convolutional neural network with U-net skip connections as the decoder to segment an MRI slice by slice. Slice vertical location is provided as an extra input. The model was trained on scans from 425 patients in the open-access ADNI+IXI datasets, and using FreeSurfer segmentation as ground truth. Model performance was evaluated using the Dice Coefficient (DC) in a separate subset (N=105) of ADNI+IXI and in two extra testing sets not involved in training. In addition, FreeSurfer and StarNEt were compared to manual segmentations of the MRBrainS18 dataset, also unseen by the model. To study performance in real use cases, first, we created electrical head models derived from the FreeSurfer and StarNEt segmentations and used them for montage optimization with a common target region using a standard algorithm ( Stimweaver ) and second, we used StarNEt to successfully segment the brains of minimally conscious state (MCS) patients having suffered from brain trauma, a scenario where FreeSurfer typically fails. Our results indicate that StarNEt matches FreeSurfer performance on the trained tasks while reducing computation time from several hours to a few seconds, and with the potential to evolve into an effective technique even when patients present large brain abnormalities.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.257 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations6
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications→French-language works237,207→