A deep learning segmentation-classification pipeline for X-ray-based COVID-19 diagnosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the past year, the AI community has constructed several deep learning models for diagnosing COVID-19 based on the visual features of chest X-rays. While deep learning researchers have commonly focused much of their attention on designing deep learning classifiers, only a fraction of these same researchers have dedicated effort to including a segmentation module in their system. This is unfortunate since other applications in radiology typically require segmentation as a necessary prerequisite step in building truly deployable clinical models. Differentiating COVID-19 from other pulmonary diseases can be challenging as various lung diseases share common visual features with COVID-19. To help clarify the diagnosis of suspected COVID-19 patients, we have designed our deep learning pipeline with a segmentation module and ensemble classifier. Following a detailed description of our deep learning pipeline, we present the strengths and shortcomings of our approach and compare our model with other similarly constructed models. While doing so, we focus our attention on widely circulated public datasets and describe several fallacies we have noticed in the literature concerning them. After performing a thorough comparative analysis, we demonstrate that our best model can successfully obtain an accuracy of 91 percent and sensitivity of 92 percent.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".