Machine learning to detect brain lesions in focal epilepsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Identifying areas of abnormality on MRI brain scans in individuals with focal epilepsy is funda- mental to the diagnosis and treatment of the condition. However, in about a third of patients with focal epilepsy, brain scans appear to be normal (MRI-negative) as human observers cannot detect any abnormality with cur- rent imaging technology. The objective of this paper is to provide a novel approach in presenting localization using machine learning in order to locate areas of abnormality on patients with focal epilepsy on a per-voxel basis by comparing them with healthy controls. As a proof-of-concept, the technique is first applied to patients with visible lesions providing a ground truth (MRI-positive), but future work will extend this to MRI-negative subjects. METHODS: Our data consists of multi-modal brain MR images from 62 healthy control subjects and 44 MRI- positive patients with focal epilepsy. We utilized a support vector machine (SVM) as our probabilistic classifier and train it with two classes of data. We generate probability maps applying our machine learning classifier on all voxels of a test subjects to visualize the predictions. Overlap scores are used to evaluate the classifier performance in MRI-positive patients. RESULTS: Our model reached 83% specificity, 91% sensitivity, and an Area Under the Curve (AUC) of 0.896 for the task of voxel-based classification of normal versus abnormal voxels. In addition, Dice scores of up to 0.66 were achieved for the overlap measure of lesion probability map and the ground truth labels annotated by a neurologist. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated a novel approach in presenting localization using machine learning tech- niques to localize focal epilepsy lesions from multi-modal MR images.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".