Fractal dimension of retinal vasculature as an image quality metric for automated fundus image analysis systems
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Automated fundus screening is becoming a significant programme of telemedicine in ophthalmology. Instant quality evaluation of uploaded retinal images could decrease unreliable diagnosis. In this work, we propose fractal dimension of retinal vasculature as an easy, effective and explainable indicator of retinal image quality. The pipeline of our approach is as follows: utilize image pre-processing technique to standardize input retinal images from possibly different sources to a uniform style; then, an improved deep learning empowered vessel segmentation model is employed to extract retinal vessels from the pre-processed images; finally, a box counting module is used to measure the fractal dimension of segmented vessel images. A small fractal threshold (could be a value between 1.45 and 1.50) indicates insufficient image quality. Our approach has been validated on 30,644 images from four public database.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it