MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

An Open-Access Experimental Dataset for Breast Microwave Imaging

2020· article· en· W3041607742 on OpenAlexaffabout
Tyson Reimer, Jordan Krenkevich, Stephen Pistorius

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrowave Imaging and Scattering Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrowave imagingLogistic regressionComputer scienceBreast cancerImaging phantomArtificial intelligenceMachine learningBreast imagingMedical imagingClassifier (UML)MammographyMedical physicsData miningMicrowaveMedicineCancerRadiologyTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Microwave imaging has shown potential for breast cancer screening, but further evaluation of the clinical viability of breast microwave imaging (BMI) systems is required. Previous phantom studies have shown promise, but after decades of BMI research, simulation studies still dominate. This work addresses the challenges of small sample sizes and a lack of experimental data by providing an open-source experimental dataset, obtained using a pre-clinical BMI system. The University of Manitoba BMI Dataset (UM-BMID) contains data from 1257 phantom scans. UM-BMID is publicly available, and the community is encouraged to use it for large-scale BMI analysis. The application of logistic regression for tumor-detection on a subset of the dataset was studied to demonstrate one use of UM-BMID. The diagnostic accuracy of the classifier was (85 ± 4)%, demonstrating the promise of machine learning methods for tumor-detection in BMI.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.018

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.296 · 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
GenreDataset

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

Citations54
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMicrowave Imaging and Scattering AnalysisFrench-language works237,207