MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3094581989 · doi:10.1109/access.2020.3033492

Class-Aware Image Search for Interpretable Cancer Identification

2020· article· en· W3094581989 on OpenAlexafffund
Arash Ebrahimian, Hossein Mohammadi, Morteza Babaie, Nima Maftoon, Hamid R. Tizhoosh

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersOntario Research Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceMetadataClassifier (UML)Class (philosophy)Image retrievalArtificial intelligenceIdentification (biology)Contextual image classificationInformation retrievalPattern recognition (psychology)Machine learningImage (mathematics)Data miningWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent times, the performance of computer-aided diagnosis systems in classification of malignancies has significantly improved. Search and retrieval methods are specifically important as they assist physicians in making the right diagnosis in medical imaging owing to their ability of obtaining similar cases for a query image. Supervised classification algorithms are generally more accurate than unsupervised search-based classifications; however, the latter may more easily provide insights into the decision-making process by providing a group of similar cases and their corresponding metadata (i.e., diagnostic reports) and not simply a class probability. In this study, we propose a class-aware search operating on deep image embeddings to increase the accuracy of content-based search. We validate our methodology using two different publicly available datasets, one containing endometrial cancer images and the other containing colorectal cancer images. The proposed class-aware scenarios can enhance the accuracy of the search-based classifier, thereby making them more feasible in practice. With search results providing access to the metadata of retrieved cases (i.e., pathology reports of evidently diagnosed cases), such a combination has clear benefits for assisting experts with explainable results.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.605

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicAI in cancer detectionFrench-language works237,207