Novel Subtypes of Pulmonary Emphysema Based on Spatially-Informed Lung Texture Learning: The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) COPD Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pulmonary emphysema overlaps considerably with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and is traditionally subcategorized into three subtypes previously identified on autopsy. Unsupervised learning of emphysema subtypes on computed tomography (CT) opens the way to new definitions of emphysema subtypes and eliminates the need of thorough manual labeling. However, CT-based emphysema subtypes have been limited to texture-based patterns without considering spatial location. In this work, we introduce a standardized spatial mapping of the lung for quantitative study of lung texture location and propose a novel framework for combining spatial and texture information to discover spatially-informed lung texture patterns (sLTPs) that represent novel emphysema subtype candidates. Exploiting two cohorts of full-lung CT scans from the MESA COPD (n = 317) and EMCAP (n = 22) studies, we first show that our spatial mapping enables population-wide study of emphysema spatial location. We then evaluate the characteristics of the sLTPs discovered on MESA COPD, and show that they are reproducible, able to encode standard emphysema subtypes, and associated with physiological symptoms.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".