MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200066891 · doi:10.1016/j.media.2021.102336

Head and neck tumor segmentation in PET/CT: The HECKTOR challenge

2021· article· en· W4200066891 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Image Analysis · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer AgencyUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSegmentationThresholdingArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceSørensen–Dice coefficientModality (human–computer interaction)Leverage (statistics)Positron emission tomographyMedicineNuclear medicineMedical physicsPattern recognition (psychology)Image segmentationComputer visionImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper relates the post-analysis of the first edition of the HEad and neCK TumOR (HECKTOR) challenge. This challenge was held as a satellite event of the 23rd International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention (MICCAI) 2020, and was the first of its kind focusing on lesion segmentation in combined FDG-PET and CT image modalities. The challenge's task is the automatic segmentation of the Gross Tumor Volume (GTV) of Head and Neck (H&N) oropharyngeal primary tumors in FDG-PET/CT images. To this end, the participants were given a training set of 201 cases from four different centers and their methods were tested on a held-out set of 53 cases from a fifth center. The methods were ranked according to the Dice Score Coefficient (DSC) averaged across all test cases. An additional inter-observer agreement study was organized to assess the difficulty of the task from a human perspective. 64 teams registered to the challenge, among which 10 provided a paper detailing their approach. The best method obtained an average DSC of 0.7591, showing a large improvement over our proposed baseline method and the inter-observer agreement, associated with DSCs of 0.6610 and 0.61, respectively. The automatic methods proved to successfully leverage the wealth of metabolic and structural properties of combined PET and CT modalities, significantly outperforming human inter-observer agreement level, semi-automatic thresholding based on PET images as well as other single modality-based methods. This promising performance is one step forward towards large-scale radiomics studies in H&N cancer, obviating the need for error-prone and time-consuming manual delineation of GTVs.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.496
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.311 · 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