MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214705044 · doi:10.36227/techrxiv.19089995

Spectral image clustering on dual-energy CT scans using functional regression mixtures

2022· preprint· en· W4214705044 on OpenAlexafffund
Segolene Brivet, Faïcel Chamroukhi, Mark Coates, Reza Forghani, Peter Savadjiev

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced X-ray and CT Imaging
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéFondation de l'Association des radiologistes du QuébecAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsCluster analysisComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceSpectral clusteringContext (archaeology)VoxelPattern recognition (psychology)Energy (signal processing)Data miningNuclear medicineMathematicsMedicineStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div>Dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) is an advanced CT scanning technique enabling material characterization not possible with conventional CT scans. It allows the reconstruction of energy decay curves at each 3D image voxel, representing varying image attenuation at different effective scanning energy levels. In this paper, we develop novel functional data analysis (FDA) techniques and adapt them to the analysis of DECT decay curves. More specifically, we construct functional mixture models that integrate spatial context in mixture weights, with mixture component densities being constructed upon the energy decay curves as functional observations. We design unsupervised clustering algorithms by developing dedicated expectation maximization (EM) algorithms for the maximum likelihood estimation of the model parameters.</div><div>To our knowledge, this is the first article to adapt statistical FDA tools and model-based clustering to take advantage of the full spectral information provided by DECT. </div><div>We evaluate our methods on 91 head and neck cancer DECT scans. Institutional review board approval was obtained for this study with waiver of informed consent. We compare our unsupervised clustering results to tumor contours traced manually by radiologists, as well as to several baseline algorithms. Given the inter-rater variability even among experts at delineating head and neck tumors, and given the potential importance of tissue reactions surrounding the tumor itself, our proposed methodology has the potential to add value in downstream machine learning applications for clinical outcome prediction based on DECT data in head and neck cancer.</div>

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.881
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.236 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced X-ray and CT ImagingFrench-language works237,207