MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3179650117 · doi:10.18280/ria.350306

Dense Hierarchical CNN – A Unified Approach for Brain Tumor Segmentation

2021· article· en· W3179650117 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Roohi Sille, Tanupriya Choudhury, Piyush Chauhan, Durgansh Sharma

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue d intelligence artificielle · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicBrain Tumor Detection and Classification
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSegmentationArtificial intelligenceComputer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Scale-space segmentationSørensen–Dice coefficientCluster analysisDiceMarket segmentationHierarchical clusteringSegmentation-based object categorizationNoise (video)Image segmentationImage (mathematics)MathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Brain tumor segmentation is an essential and challenging task because of the heterogeneous nature of neoplastic tissue in spatial and imaging techniques. Manual segmentation of the tumor in MRI images is prone to error and time-consuming tasks. An efficient segmentation mechanism is vital to the accurate classification and segmentation of tumorous cells. This study presents an efficient hierarchical clustering-based dense CNN approach for accurately classifying and segmenting the brain tumor cells in MRI images. The research focuses on improving the efficiency of the segmentation algorithms by considering the qualitative measures such as the dice score coefficient using quantitative parameters such as mean square error and peak signal to noise ratio. The experimental analysis states the efficacy and prominence of the proposed technique compared to other models are tabulated within the paper.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue d intelligence artificielleSame topicBrain Tumor Detection and ClassificationFrench-language works237,207