MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3168214987 · doi:10.1017/cjn.2021.91

Synthesis of glioma histopathology images using generative adversarial networks

2021· article· en· W3168214987 on OpenAlexaffvenue
AB Levine, Jason Peng, Sjm Jones, Ali Bashashati, Stephen Yip

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceDiscriminatorArtificial intelligenceDeep learningGenerative grammarGenerator (circuit theory)Set (abstract data type)Pattern recognition (psychology)Machine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep learning, a subset of artificial intelligence, has shown great potential in several recent applications to pathology. These have mainly involved the use of classifiers to diagnose disease, while generative modelling techniques have been less frequently used. Generative adversarial networks (GANs) are a type of deep learning model that has been used to synthesize realistic images in a range of domains, both general purpose and medical. In the GAN framework, a generator network is trained to synthesize fake images, while a dueling discriminator network aims to distinguish between the fake images and a set of real training images. As GAN training progresses, the generator network ideally learns the important features of a dataset, allowing it to create images that the discriminator cannot distinguish from the real ones. We report on our use of GANs to synthesize high resolution, realistic histopathology images of gliomas. The well- known Progressive GAN framework was trained on a set of image patches extracted from digital slides in the Cancer Genome Atlas repository, and was able to generate fake images that were visually indistinguishable from the real training images. Generative modelling in pathology has numerous potential applications, including dataset augmentation for training deep learning classifiers, image processing, and expanding educational material. LEARNING OBJECTIVES This presentation will enable the learner to: 1. Explain basic principles of generative modelling in deep learning. 2. Discuss applications of deep learning to neuropathology image synthesis.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.228 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques→Same topicAI in cancer detection→French-language works237,207→