MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3163753640 · doi:10.1038/s41598-024-52183-4

DiagSet: a dataset for prostate cancer histopathological image classification

2024· article· en· W3163753640 on OpenAlexaff
Michał Koziarski, Bogusław Cyganek, Przemysław Niedziela, Bogusław Olborski, Zbigniew Antosz, Marcin Żydak, Bogdan Kwolek, Paweł Wąsowicz, Andrzej Bukała, Jakub Swadźba, Piotr Sitkowski

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsMila - Quebec Artificial Intelligence Institute
FundersEuropean Regional Development FundNational Center for Research and Development
KeywordsMedical diagnosisThresholdingComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Prostate cancerCancer detectionCancerImage (mathematics)Machine learningRadiologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cancer diseases constitute one of the most significant societal challenges. In this paper, we introduce a novel histopathological dataset for prostate cancer detection. The proposed dataset, consisting of over 2.6 million tissue patches extracted from 430 fully annotated scans, 4675 scans with assigned binary diagnoses, and 46 scans with diagnoses independently provided by a group of histopathologists can be found at https://github.com/michalkoziarski/DiagSet . Furthermore, we propose a machine learning framework for detection of cancerous tissue regions and prediction of scan-level diagnosis, utilizing thresholding to abstain from the decision in uncertain cases. The proposed approach, composed of ensembles of deep neural networks operating on the histopathological scans at different scales, achieves 94.6% accuracy in patch-level recognition and is compared in a scan-level diagnosis with 9 human histopathologists showing high statistical agreement.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.910
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations41
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicAI in cancer detectionFrench-language works237,207