MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4212846736 · doi:10.1109/tuffc.2022.3151647

MCAL: An Anatomical Knowledge Learning Model for Myocardial Segmentation in 2-D Echocardiography

2022· article· en· W4212846736 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics Ferroelectrics and Frequency Control · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMedical Image Segmentation Techniques
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Shandong ProvinceChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaMedical Research CouncilShandong University
KeywordsSegmentationBoundary (topology)Pattern recognition (psychology)Focus (optics)Feature (linguistics)Image segmentationProcess (computing)PixelConvolution (computer science)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Segmentation of the left ventricular (LV) myocardium in 2-D echocardiography is essential for clinical decision making, especially in geometry measurement and index computation. However, segmenting the myocardium is a time-consuming process and challenging due to the fuzzy boundary caused by the low image quality. The ground-truth label is employed as pixel-level class associations or shape regulation in segmentation, which works limit for effective feature enhancement for 2-D echocardiography. We propose a training strategy named multiconstrained aggregate learning (referred to as MCAL), which leverages anatomical knowledge learned through ground-truth labels to infer segmented parts and discriminate boundary pixels. The new framework encourages the model to focus on the features in accordance with the learned anatomical representations, and the training objectives incorporate a boundary distance transform weight (BDTW) to enforce a higher weight value on the boundary region, which helps to improve the segmentation accuracy. The proposed method is built as an end-to-end framework with a top-down, bottom-up architecture with skip convolution fusion blocks and carried out on two datasets (our dataset and the public CAMUS dataset). The comparison study shows that the proposed network outperforms the other segmentation baseline models, indicating that our method is beneficial for boundary pixels discrimination in segmentation.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.943
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations15
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics Ferroelectrics and Frequency ControlSame topicMedical Image Segmentation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207