MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3141482012 · doi:10.1109/jbhi.2021.3070235

Quantifying Axial Spine Images Using Object-Specific Bi-Path Network

2021· article· en· W3141482012 on OpenAlexaff
Liyan Lin, Xi Tao, Wei Yang, Shumao Pang, Zhihai Su, Hai Lü, Shuo Li, Qianjin Feng, Bo Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMedical Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersChina Scholarship CouncilChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceFeature extractionPattern recognition (psychology)Deep learningFeature (linguistics)UpsamplingComputer visionPoolingRegularization (linguistics)Image (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Automatic estimation of indices from medical images is the main goal of computer-aided quantification (CADq), which speeds up diagnosis and lightens the workload of radiologists. Deep learning technique is a good choice for implementing CADq. Usually, to acquire high-accuracy quantification, specific network architecture needs to be designed for a given CADq task. In this study, considering that the target organs are the intervertebral disc and the dural sac, we propose an object-specific bi-path network (OSBP-Net) for axial spine image quantification. Each path of the OSBP-Net comprises a shallow feature extraction layer (SFE) and a deep feature extraction sub-network (DFE). The SFEs use different convolution strides because the two target organs have different anatomical sizes. The DFEs use average pooling for downsampling based on the observation that the target organs have lower intensity than the background. In addition, an inter-path dissimilarity constraint is proposed and applied to the output of the SFEs, taking into account that the activated regions in the feature maps of two paths should be different theoretically. An inter-index correlation regularization is introduced and applied to the output of the DFEs based on the observation that the diameter and area of the same object express an approximately linear relation. The prediction results of OSBP-Net are compared to several state-of-the-art machine learning-based CADq methods. The comparison reveals that the proposed methods precede other competing methods extensively, indicating its great potential for spine CADq.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.262 · 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
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health InformaticsSame topicMedical Imaging and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207