MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W341325887 · doi:10.1016/j.nicl.2015.05.001

Rotation-invariant multi-contrast non-local means for MS lesion segmentation

2015· article· en· W341325887 on OpenAlexafffund
Nicolas Guizard, Pierrick Coupé, Vladimir Fonov, José V. Manjón, Douglas L. Arnold, D. Louis Collins

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroImage Clinical · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsMontreal Neurological Institute and HospitalMcGill University
FundersMinisterio de Economía y CompetitividadAgence Nationale de la RechercheCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMultiple Sclerosis SocietyMultiple Sclerosis Society of Canada
KeywordsSegmentationInvariant (physics)Contrast (vision)LesionPhysicsRotation (mathematics)Nuclear magnetic resonanceArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)NeurosciencePsychologyMedicineComputer sciencePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multiple sclerosis (MS) lesion segmentation is crucial for evaluating disease burden, determining disease progression and measuring the impact of new clinical treatments. MS lesions can vary in size, location and intensity, making automatic segmentation challenging. In this paper, we propose a new supervised method to segment MS lesions from 3D magnetic resonance (MR) images using non-local means (NLM). The method uses a multi-channel and rotation-invariant distance measure to account for the diversity of MS lesions. The proposed segmentation method, rotation-invariant multi-contrast non-local means segmentation (RMNMS), captures the MS lesion spatial distribution and can accurately and robustly identify lesions regardless of their orientation, shape or size. An internal validation on a large clinical magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) dataset of MS patients demonstrated a good similarity measure result (Dice similarity = 60.1% and sensitivity = 75.4%), a strong correlation between expert and automatic lesion load volumes (R(2) = 0.91), and a strong ability to detect lesions of different sizes and in varying spatial locations (lesion detection rate = 79.8%). On the independent MS Grand Challenge (MSGC) dataset validation, our method provided competitive results with state-of-the-art supervised and unsupervised methods. Qualitative visual and quantitative voxel- and lesion-wise evaluations demonstrated the accuracy of RMNMS method.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.297
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.169 · 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

Citations74
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroImage ClinicalSame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207