Automated Final Lesion Segmentation in Posterior Circulation Acute Ischemic Stroke Using Deep Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Final lesion volume (FLV) is a surrogate outcome measure in anterior circulation stroke (ACS). In posterior circulation stroke (PCS), this relation is plausibly understudied due to a lack of methods that automatically quantify FLV. The applicability of deep learning approaches to PCS is limited due to its lower incidence compared to ACS. We evaluated strategies to develop a convolutional neural network (CNN) for PCS lesion segmentation by using image data from both ACS and PCS patients. We included follow-up non-contrast computed tomography scans of 1018 patients with ACS and 107 patients with PCS. To assess whether an ACS lesion segmentation generalizes to PCS, a CNN was trained on ACS data (ACS-CNN). Second, to evaluate the performance of only including PCS patients, a CNN was trained on PCS data. Third, to evaluate the performance when combining the datasets, a CNN was trained on both datasets. Finally, to evaluate the performance of transfer learning, the ACS-CNN was fine-tuned using PCS patients. The transfer learning strategy outperformed the other strategies in volume agreement with an intra-class correlation of 0.88 (95% CI: 0.83-0.92) vs. 0.55 to 0.83 and a lesion detection rate of 87% vs. 41-77 for the other strategies. Hence, transfer learning improved the FLV quantification and detection rate of PCS lesions compared to the other strategies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".