MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3025036301 · doi:10.1002/mp.13678

Machine and deep learning methods for radiomics

2020· review· en· W3025036301 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsRadiomicsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceDeep learningMachine learningMedical imagingStandardizationData scienceTranslational researchPrecision medicineBig dataMedical physicsMedicineData miningPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Radiomics is an emerging area in quantitative image analysis that aims to relate large-scale extracted imaging information to clinical and biological endpoints. The development of quantitative imaging methods along with machine learning has enabled the opportunity to move data science research towards translation for more personalized cancer treatments. Accumulating evidence has indeed demonstrated that noninvasive advanced imaging analytics, that is, radiomics, can reveal key components of tumor phenotype for multiple three-dimensional lesions at multiple time points over and beyond the course of treatment. These developments in the use of CT, PET, US, and MR imaging could augment patient stratification and prognostication buttressing emerging targeted therapeutic approaches. In recent years, deep learning architectures have demonstrated their tremendous potential for image segmentation, reconstruction, recognition, and classification. Many powerful open-source and commercial platforms are currently available to embark in new research areas of radiomics. Quantitative imaging research, however, is complex and key statistical principles should be followed to realize its full potential. The field of radiomics, in particular, requires a renewed focus on optimal study design/reporting practices and standardization of image acquisition, feature calculation, and rigorous statistical analysis for the field to move forward. In this article, the role of machine and deep learning as a major computational vehicle for advanced model building of radiomics-based signatures or classifiers, and diverse clinical applications, working principles, research opportunities, and available computational platforms for radiomics will be reviewed with examples drawn primarily from oncology. We also address issues related to common applications in medical physics, such as standardization, feature extraction, model building, and validation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.382 · 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