Multimodality carotid plaque tissue characterization and classification in the artificial intelligence paradigm: a narrative review for stroke application
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality in the United States of America and globally. Carotid arterial plaque, a cause and also a marker of such CVD, can be detected by various non-invasive imaging modalities such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computer tomography (CT), and ultrasound (US). Characterization and classification of carotid plaque-type in these imaging modalities, especially into symptomatic and asymptomatic plaque, helps in the planning of carotid endarterectomy or stenting. It can be challenging to characterize plaque components due to (I) partial volume effect in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or (II) varying Hausdorff values in plaque regions in CT, and (III) attenuation of echoes reflected by the plaque during US causing acoustic shadowing. Artificial intelligence (AI) methods have become an indispensable part of healthcare and their applications to the non-invasive imaging technologies such as MRI, CT, and the US. In this narrative review, three main types of AI models (machine learning, deep learning, and transfer learning) are analyzed when applied to MRI, CT, and the US. A link between carotid plaque characteristics and the risk of coronary artery disease is presented. With regard to characterization, we review tools and techniques that use AI models to distinguish carotid plaque types based on signal processing and feature strengths. We conclude that AI-based solutions offer an accurate and robust path for tissue characterization and classification for carotid artery plaque imaging in all three imaging modalities. Due to cost, user-friendliness, and clinical effectiveness, AI in the US has dominated the most.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".