MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3005161615 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0228132

Multiclass classification of autofluorescence images of oral cavity lesions based on quantitative analysis

2020· article· en· W3005161615 on OpenAlex
Ming‐Jer Jeng, Mukta Sharma, Ting-Yu Chao, Ying-Chang Li, Shiang‐Fu Huang, Liann‐Be Chang, Lee Chow

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicOral Health Pathology and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBC Cancer AgencyChang Gung Memorial Hospital, LinkouChang Gung UniversityChang Gung Memorial Hospital
KeywordsAutofluorescenceLinear discriminant analysisArtificial intelligenceTongueMedicineQuadratic classifierPattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsPathologyComputer scienceClassifier (UML)Physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Oral cancer is one of the most common diseases globally. Conventional oral examination and histopathological examination are the two main clinical methods for diagnosing oral cancer early. VELscope is an oral cancer-screening device that exploited autofluorescence. It yields inconsistent results when used to differentiate between normal, premalignant and malignant lesions. We develop a new method to increase the accuracy of differentiation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five samples (images) of each of 21 normal mucosae, as well as 31 premalignant and 16 malignant lesions of the tongue and buccal mucosa were collected under both white light and autofluorescence (VELscope, 400-460 nm wavelength). The images were developed using an iPod (Apple, Atlanta Georgia, USA). RESULTS: The normalized intensity and standard deviation of intensity were calculated to classify image pixels from the region of interest (ROI). Linear discriminant analysis (LDA) and quadratic discriminant analysis (QDA) classifiers were used. The performance of both of the classifiers was evaluated with respect to accuracy, precision, and recall. These parameters were used for multiclass classification. The accuracy rate of LDA with un-normalized data was increased by 2% and 14% and that of QDA was increased by 16% and 25% for the tongue and buccal mucosa, respectively. CONCLUSION: The QDA algorithm outperforms the LDA classifier in the analysis of autofluorescence images with respect to all of the standard evaluation parameters.

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.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.313

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 head0.232
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.136 · 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