Osteoporosis Detection in Lumbar Spine L1-L4 based on Trabecular Bone Texture Features
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The proposed work can be divided into two parts: first, remove the noise from the trabecular lumbar spine L1-L4 of the X-ray images using two-stage principal component analysis with neighbourhood pixel grouping, followed by a hybrid median filter, and the texture features are enhanced with sharpening combined with range filters.Second, detect osteoporosis using texture features.This can be done by one-dimensional discrete wavelet transform, followed by a two-dimensional edge detection filter.Finally, classify the normal or osteoporotic images according to conventional classifications.Testing is conducted using X-ray images and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) reports from the same person.The DXA report describes a statistical analysis of normal or osteoporotic, but the proposed work is classified as osteoporotic or normal according to the texture features.Classified results are validated with the DXA and provide an average accuracy of 99.18%.The proposed method has better diagnostic accuracy than the existing method using DXA with X-ray.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".