Deep learning-based tumor segmentation on digital images of histopathology slides for microdosimetry applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
$\bf{Purpose:}$ The goal of this study was (i) to use artificial intelligence to automate the traditionally labor-intensive process of manual segmentation of tumor regions in pathology slides performed by a pathologist and (ii) to validate the use of a well-known and readily available deep learning architecture. Automation will reduce the human error involved in manual delineation, increase efficiency, and result in accurate and reproducible segmentation. This advancement will alleviate the bottleneck in the workflow in clinical and research applications due to a lack of pathologist time. Our application is patient-specific microdosimetry and radiobiological modeling, which builds on the contoured pathology slides. $\bf{Methods:}$ A U-Net architecture was used to segment tumor regions in pathology core biopsies of lung tissue with adenocarcinoma stained using hematoxylin and eosin. A pathologist manually contoured the tumor regions in 56 images with binary masks for training. Overlapping patch extraction with various patch sizes and image downsampling were investigated individually. Data augmentation and 8-fold cross-validation were used. $\bf{Results:}$ The U-Net achieved accuracy of 0.91$\pm$0.06, specificity of 0.90$\pm$0.08, sensitivity of 0.92$\pm$0.07, and precision of 0.8$\pm$0.1. The F1/DICE score was 0.85$\pm$0.07, with a segmentation time of 3.24$\pm$0.03 seconds per image, achieving a 370$\pm$3 times increased efficiency over manual segmentation. In some cases, the U-Net correctly delineated the tumor's stroma from its epithelial component in regions that were classified as tumor by the pathologist. $\bf{Conclusion:}$ The U-Net architecture can segment images with a level of efficiency and accuracy that makes it suitable for tumor segmentation of histopathological images in fields such as radiotherapy dosimetry, specifically in the subfields of microdosimetry.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".