MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3006101259

Deep Convolutional Networks for Automated Detection of Epileptogenic Brain Malformations

2018· article· en· W3006101259 on OpenAlexaff
Ravnoor Gill, Seok‐Jun Hong, Fatemeh Fadaie, Benoît Caldairou, Boris C. Bernhardt, Carmen Barba, Armin Brandt, Vanessa Cristina Mendes Coelho, Ludovico D’Incerti, Matteo Lenge, Mira Semmelroch, Fabrice Bartoloméi, Fernando Cendes, Francesco Deleo, Renzo Guerrini, Maxime Guye, Graeme D. Jackson, Andreas Schulze‐Bonhage, Tommaso Mansi, Neda Bernasconi, Andrea Bernasconi

Bibliographic record

VenueLecture notes in computer science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Canadian institutionsMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvolutional neural networkComputer scienceCortical dysplasiaArtificial intelligenceVoxelPattern recognition (psychology)Magnetic resonance imagingMedicineRadiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Focal cortical dysplasia (FCD) is a prevalent surgically-amenable epileptogenic malformation of cortical development. On MRI, FCD typically presents with cortical thickening, hyperintensity, and blurring of the gray-white matter interface. These changes may be visible to the naked eye, or subtle and be easily overlooked. Despite advances in MRI analytics, current surface-based algorithms fail to detect FCD in 50% of cases. Moreover, arduous data pre-processing and specialized expertise preclude widespread use. Here we propose a novel algorithm that harnesses feature-learning capability of convolutional neural networks (CNNs) with minimal data pre-processing. Our classifier, trained on a patch-based augmented dataset derived from patients with histologically-validated FCD operates directly on MRI voxels to distinguish the lesion from healthy tissue. The algorithm was trained and cross-validated on multimodal MRI data from a single site (S1) and evaluated on independent data from S1 and six other sites worldwide (S2–S7; 3 scanner manufacturers and 2 field strengths) for a total of 107 subjects. The classifier showed excellent sensitivity (S1: 87%, 35/40 lesions detected; S2–S7: 91%, 61/67 lesions detected) and specificity (S1: 95%, no findings in 36/38 healthy controls; 90%, no findings in 57/63 disease controls). Easy implementation, minimal pre-processing, high performance and generalizability make this classifier an ideal platform for large-scale clinical use, particularly in “MRI-negative” FCD.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.734
Threshold uncertainty score0.265

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.278 · 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
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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLecture notes in computer scienceSame topicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical ImagingFrench-language works237,207