MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3177773712 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2107.02345

Domain Adaptation via CycleGAN for Retina Segmentation in Optical Coherence Tomography

2021· preprint· en· W3177773712 on OpenAlexaff
Ricky Chen, Timothy T. Yu, Gavin Xu, Da Ma, Marinko V. Šarunic, Mirza Faisal Beg

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceOptical coherence tomographyArtificial intelligenceSegmentationDomain adaptationAdaptation (eye)Medical diagnosisDomain (mathematical analysis)Machine learningSet (abstract data type)Pipeline (software)Generalizability theoryData setMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the FDA approval of Artificial Intelligence (AI) for point-of-care clinical diagnoses, model generalizability is of the utmost importance as clinical decision-making must be domain-agnostic. A method of tackling the problem is to increase the dataset to include images from a multitude of domains; while this technique is ideal, the security requirements of medical data is a major limitation. Additionally, researchers with developed tools benefit from the addition of open-sourced data, but are limited by the difference in domains. Herewith, we investigated the implementation of a Cycle-Consistent Generative Adversarial Networks (CycleGAN) for the domain adaptation of Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) volumes. This study was done in collaboration with the Biomedical Optics Research Group and Functional & Anatomical Imaging & Shape Analysis Lab at Simon Fraser University. In this study, we investigated a learning-based approach of adapting the domain of a publicly available dataset, UK Biobank dataset (UKB). To evaluate the performance of domain adaptation, we utilized pre-existing retinal layer segmentation tools developed on a different set of RETOUCH OCT data. This study provides insight on state-of-the-art tools for domain adaptation compared to traditional processing techniques as well as a pipeline for adapting publicly available retinal data to the domains previously used by our collaborators.

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)0.003
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 score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.148 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicAI in cancer detectionFrench-language works237,207