AI-Based Detection, Classification and Prediction/Prognosis in Medical Imaging: Towards Radiophenomics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (AI) techniques have significant potential to enable effective, robust, and automated image phenotyping including the identification of subtle patterns. AI-based detection searches the image space to find the regions of interest based on patterns and features. There is a spectrum of tumor histologies from benign to malignant that can be identified by AI-based classification approaches using image features. The extraction of minable information from images gives way to the field of "radiomics" and can be explored via explicit (handcrafted/engineered) and deep radiomics frameworks. Radiomics analysis has the potential to be used as a noninvasive technique for the accurate characterization of tumors to improve diagnosis and treatment monitoring. This work reviews AI-based techniques, with a special focus on oncological PET and PET/CT imaging, for different detection, classification, and prediction/prognosis tasks. We also discuss needed efforts to enable the translation of AI techniques to routine clinical workflows, and potential improvements and complementary techniques such as the use of natural language processing on electronic health records and neuro-symbolic AI techniques.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".