MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4283368426 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1720353/v1

Using End-to-End imbalanced Temporal Deep Gaussian Process (iTDGP) to Predict Acute Ischemic Stroke Lesions

2022· preprint· en· W4283368426 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mohsen Soltanpour, Muhammad Yousefnezhad, Russ Greiner, Pierre Boulanger, Brian Buck

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVoxelComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceProbabilistic logicGaussian processStroke (engine)Cerebral blood flowBaseline (sea)Process (computing)Pattern recognition (psychology)GaussianMedicineCardiologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract As one of the leading causes of mortality and disability worldwide, Acute Ischemic Stroke (AIS) occurs when the blood supply to the brain is suddenly interrupted because of a blocked artery. Within seconds of AIS onset, the brain cells surrounding the blocked artery die. The automated and precise prediction of AIS lesions plays a vital role in the treatment planning and prevention of further injuries. Unfortunately, the current standard AIS assessment method, which thresholds the 3D measurement maps extracted from Computed Tomography Perfusion (CTP) images, is not accurate enough. Due to this fact, in this article, we propose the imbalanced Temporal Deep Gaussian Process (iTDGP), a probabilistic model that can improve AIS lesions prediction by using baseline CTP time series. Our proposed model can effectively extract temporal information from the CTP time series and map it to the class labels of the brain's voxels. In addition, by using batch training and voxel-level analysis iTDGP can learn from a few patients and it is robust against imbalanced classes. Moreover, our model incorporates a post-processor capable of improving prediction accuracy using spatial information. Our comprehensive experiments, on the ISLES 2018 and the University of Alberta Hospital (UAH) datasets (including 63 and 100 patients respectively), show that iTDGP performs better than state-of-the-art AIS lesion predictors, obtaining the (cross-validation) Dice score of 71.42% and 65.37% with a significant p<0.05, respectively.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.346 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management→French-language works237,207→