MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3011129081 · doi:10.1117/1.jmi.7.4.042803

Quantitative imaging feature pipeline: a web-based tool for utilizing, sharing, and building image-processing pipelines

2020· article· en· W3011129081 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sarah A. Mattonen, Dev Gude, Sebastian Echegaray, Shaimaa Bakr, Daniel L. Rubin, Sandy Napel

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Imaging · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsUploadComputer scienceSoftwarePipeline (software)Graphical user interfaceSegmentationFeature (linguistics)Interface (matter)Image processingApplication programming interfaceImage file formatsSource codeMachine learningArtificial intelligenceImage (mathematics)World Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quantitative image features that can be computed from medical images are proving to be valuable biomarkers of underlying cancer biology that can be used for assessing treatment response and predicting clinical outcomes. However, validation and eventual clinical implementation of these tools is challenging due to the absence of shared software algorithms, architectures, and the tools required for computing, comparing, evaluating, and disseminating predictive models. Similarly, researchers need to have programming expertise in order to complete these tasks. The quantitative image feature pipeline (QIFP) is an open-source, web-based, graphical user interface (GUI) of configurable quantitative image-processing pipelines for both planar (two-dimensional) and volumetric (three-dimensional) medical images. This allows researchers and clinicians a GUI-driven approach to process and analyze images, without having to write any software code. The QIFP allows users to upload a repository of linked imaging, segmentation, and clinical data or access publicly available datasets (e.g., The Cancer Imaging Archive) through direct links. Researchers have access to a library of file conversion, segmentation, quantitative image feature extraction, and machine learning algorithms. An interface is also provided to allow users to upload their own algorithms in Docker containers. The QIFP gives researchers the tools and infrastructure for the assessment and development of new imaging biomarkers and the ability to use them for single and multicenter clinical and virtual clinical trials.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: Software
Teacher disagreement score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.274

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0820.043

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreSoftware

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

Citations26
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical ImagingSame topicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical ImagingFrench-language works237,207