Assessing invasiveness of subsolid lung adenocarcinomas with combined attenuation and geometric feature models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to develop and test multiclass predictive models for assessing the invasiveness of individual lung adenocarcinomas presenting as subsolid nodules on computed tomography (CT). 227 lung adenocarcinomas were included: 31 atypical adenomatous hyperplasia and adenocarcinomas in situ (class H1), 64 minimally invasive adenocarcinomas (class H2) and 132 invasive adenocarcinomas (class H3). Nodules were segmented, and geometric and CT attenuation features including functional principal component analysis features (FPC1 and FPC2) were extracted. After a feature selection step, two predictive models were built with ordinal regression: Model 1 based on volume (log) (logarithm of the nodule volume) and FPC1, and Model 2 based on volume (log) and Q.875 (CT attenuation value at the 87.5% percentile). Using the 200-repeats Monte-Carlo cross-validation method, these models provided a multiclass classification of invasiveness with discriminative power AUCs of 0.83 to 0.87 and predicted the class probabilities with less than a 10% average error. The predictive modelling approach adopted in this paper provides a detailed insight on how the value of the main predictors contribute to the probability of nodule invasiveness and underlines the role of nodule CT attenuation features in the nodule invasiveness classification.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".