Deep Bayesian networks for uncertainty estimation and adversarial resistance of white matter hyperintensity segmentation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
White matter hyperintensities (WMHs) are frequently observed on structural neuroimaging of elderly populations and are associated with cognitive decline and increased risk of dementia. Many existing WMH segmentation algorithms produce suboptimal results in populations with vascular lesions or brain atrophy, or require parameter tuning and are computationally expensive. Additionally, most algorithms do not generate a confidence estimate of segmentation quality, limiting their interpretation. MRI-based segmentation methods are often sensitive to acquisition protocols, scanners, noise-level, and image contrast, failing to generalize to other populations and out-of-distribution datasets. Given these concerns, we propose a novel Bayesian 3D convolutional neural network with a U-Net architecture that automatically segments WMH, provides uncertainty estimates of the segmentation output for quality control, and is robust to changes in acquisition protocols. We also provide a second model to differentiate deep and periventricular WMH. Four hundred thirty-two subjects were recruited to train the CNNs from four multisite imaging studies. A separate test set of 158 subjects was used for evaluation, including an unseen multisite study. We compared our model to two established state-of-the-art techniques (BIANCA and DeepMedic), highlighting its accuracy and efficiency. Our Bayesian 3D U-Net achieved the highest Dice similarity coefficient of 0.89 ± 0.08 and the lowest modified Hausdorff distance of 2.98 ± 4.40 mm. We further validated our models highlighting their robustness on "clinical adversarial cases" simulating data with low signal-to-noise ratio, low resolution, and different contrast (stemming from MRI sequences with different parameters). Our pipeline and models are available at: https://hypermapp3r.readthedocs.io.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".