MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3215499360 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14663766.v1

Towards Improved Medical Image Segmentation Using Deep Learning

2021· preprint· en· W3215499360 on OpenAlexaff
Nabila Abraham

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSegmentationComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMedical imagingGeneralizability theoryConvolutional neural networkDeep learningModalitiesModular designMachine learningImage segmentationBenchmark (surveying)Pattern recognition (psychology)ContouringModality (human–computer interaction)Market segmentation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Convolutional neural networks have been asserted to be fast and precise frameworks with great potential in image segmentation. Within the medical domain, image segmentation is a pre-cursor to several applications including surgical simulations, treatment planning and patient prognosis. In this thesis, we attempt to solve two major limitations of current segmentation practices: 1) dealing with unbalanced classes and 2) dealing with multiple modalities. In medical imaging, unbalanced classes present as the regions of interest that are typically significantly smaller in volume than the background class or other classes. We propose an improvement to the current gold standard cost function to boost the focus of the network to the smaller classes. Another problem within medical imaging is the variation in both anatomy and pathology across patients. Utilizing multiple imaging modalities provides complementary, segmentation-specific information and is commonly employed by radiologists when contouring data. We propose a image fusion strategy for multi-modal data that uses the variation in modality specific features to guide the task specific learning. Together, our contributions propose a framework to maximize the representational power of the dataset using models with less complexity and higher generalizability. Our contributions outperform baseline models for multi-class segmentation and are modular enough to be scaled up to deeper networks. We demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed cost function and multimodal framework, both individually and together, on benchmark datasets including the Breast Ultrasound Dataset B (BUS) [1], the International Skin Imaging Collaboration (ISIC 2018) [2], [3] and the Brain Tumor Segmentation Challenge (BraTs 2018) [4]. In all experiments, the proposed methods match or outperform the baseline methods while employing simpler networks

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAI in cancer detectionFrench-language works237,207