Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cervical cancer is a disease that annually claims the lives of over a quarter of a million women. A substantial number of these deaths could be prevented if population wide cancer screening, based on the Papanicolaou test, were globally available. The Papanicolaou test involves a visual review of cellular material obtained from the uterine cervix. While being relatively inexpensive from a material standpoint, the test requires highly trained cytology specialists to conduct the analysis. There is a great shortage of such specialists in developing countries, causing these to be grossly overrepresented in the mortality statistics. For the last 60 years, numerous attempts at constructing an automated system, able to perform the screening, have been made. Unfortunately, a cost-effective, automated system has yet to be produced. In this thesis, a set of methods, aimed to be used in the development of an automated screening system, are presented. These have been produced as part of an international cooperative effort to create a low-cost cervical cancer screening system. The contributions are linked to a number of key problems associated with the screening: Deciding which areas of a specimen that warrant analysis, delineating cervical cell nuclei, rejecting artefacts to make sure that only cells of diagnostic value are included when drawing conclusions regarding the final diagnosis of the specimen. Also, to facilitate efficient method development, two methods for creating synthetic images that mimic images acquired from specimen are described.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.004 |
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".