Deep learning-based pancreas volume assessment in individuals with type 1 diabetes
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Pancreas volume is reduced in individuals with diabetes and in autoantibody positive individuals at high risk for developing type 1 diabetes (T1D). Studies investigating pancreas volume are underway to assess pancreas volume in large clinical databases and studies, but manual pancreas annotation is time-consuming and subjective, preventing extension to large studies and databases. This study develops deep learning for automated pancreas volume measurement in individuals with diabetes. A convolutional neural network was trained using manual pancreas annotation on 160 abdominal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans from individuals with T1D, controls, or a combination thereof. Models trained using each cohort were then tested on scans of 25 individuals with T1D. Deep learning and manual segmentations of the pancreas displayed high overlap (Dice coefficient = 0.81) and excellent correlation of pancreas volume measurements (R 2 = 0.94). Correlation was highest when training data included individuals both with and without T1D. The pancreas of individuals with T1D can be automatically segmented to measure pancreas volume. This algorithm can be applied to large imaging datasets to quantify the spectrum of human pancreas volume.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it