The Evaluation of Deep Neural Networks and X-Ray as a Practical Alternative for Diagnosis and Management of COVID-19
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High-resolution computed tomography radiology is a critical tool in the diagnosis and management of COVID-19 infection; however, in smaller clinics around the world, there is a shortage of radiologists available to analyze these images. In this paper, we compare the performance of 16 available deep learning algorithms to help identify COVID19. We utilize an already existing diagnostic technology (X-ray) and an already existing neural network (ResNet-50) to diagnose COVID-19. Our approach eliminates the extra time and resources needed to develop new technology and associated algorithm, thus aiding the front-line in the race against the COVID-19 pandemic. Results show that ResNet-50 is the optimal pretrained neural network for the detection of COVID-19, using three different cross-validation ratios, based on training time, accuracy, and network size. We also present a custom visualization of the results that can be used to highlight important visual biomarkers of the disease and disease progression.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".