An <scp>end‐to‐end</scp> brain tumor segmentation system using <scp>multi‐inception‐UNET</scp>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Accurate detection and pixel‐wise classification of brain tumors in Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) scans are vital for their diagnosis, prognosis study and treatment planning. Manual segmentation of tumors from MRI is highly subjective and tedious. With recent advances in deep learning, automatic brain tumor segmentation is an emerging research direction in the medical imaging domain. We present a study to improve the automatic segmentation process by introducing size variability in the Convolutional Neural Network (CNN). For pixel‐wise classification of tumorous slices convolutional neural network‐based encoder‐decoder UNET model is referred. A multi‐inception‐UNET model is proposed to improve scalability of the UNET model. Extensive experiments have been performed using the Brain Tumor Segmentation Challenge (BRATS) datasets to establish the validity of our proposed model. Experimental results show that our proposed method achieved the best results on BraTS 2015, 2017 and 2019 datasets for complete tumor, core tumor and enhancing tumor regions respectively.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.008 |
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".