MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3119837896

Fully Automated Fibroglandular Tissue Segmentation and Bias Correction in Breast MR Images Using Level Set Method

2016· article· en· W3119837896 on OpenAlexaff
Mehri Owjimehr, Elise Fear

Bibliographic record

VenueCMBES Proceedings · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSegmentationArtificial intelligenceImage segmentationComputer visionBackground subtractionComputer scienceImage processingBreast tissueIntensity (physics)SubtractionData setBreast MRIMagnetic resonance imagingPattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsPixelMammographyImage (mathematics)PhysicsRadiologyOpticsMedicineBreast cancer
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper an image processing method is proposed for bias correction and fibroglandular tissue segmentation from Magnetic Resonance Images (MRI) of human breast. The proposed method is based on level sets and includes three steps. In the pre-processing step, a chest wall line detection method is applied to separate the chest wall from the breast region in the MR images of breast. In the next step, a new level set algorithm is employed to estimate the bias field. The bias field estimation is used for intensity inhomogeneity correction, which leads to an efficient segmentation of the fibroglandular tissue. Finally, in the post-processing step, the skin layer is detected using morphological operations, and the fibroglandular tissue is extracted after skin layer subtraction. The proposed method has been validated on 2D images of an MR scan of the human breast. The implementation results show efficient performance of this method in tissue segmentation of MR images with the presence of intensity inhomogeneity.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCMBES ProceedingsSame topicAI in cancer detectionFrench-language works237,207