RLSegNet: An Medical Image Segmentation Network Based on Reinforcement Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the area of medical image segmentation, the spatial information can be further used to enhance the image segmentation performance. And the 3D convolution is mainly used to better utilize the spatial information. However, how to better utilize the spatial information in the 2D convolution is still a challenging task. In this paper, we propose an image segmentation network based on reinforcement learning (RLSegNet), which can translate the image segmentation process into a serial of decision-making problem. The proposed RLSegNet is a U-shaped network, which is composed of three components: the feature extraction network, the Mask Prediction Network (MPNet), and the up-sampling network with the cascade attention module. The deep semantic feature in the image is first extracted by adopting the feature extraction network. Then, the Mask Prediction Network (MPNet) is proposed to generate the prediction mask for the current frame based on the prior knowledge (segmentation result). And the proposed cascade attention module is mainly used to generate the weighted feature mask so that the up-sampling network pays more attention to the interesting region. Specifically, the state, action and reward used in the reinforcement learning are redesigned in the proposed RLSegNet to translate the segmentation process as the decision-making process, which performs as the reinforcement learning to realize the brain tumor segmentation. Extensive experiments are conducted on the BRATS 2015 dataset to evaluate the proposed RLSegNet. The experimental results demonstrate that the proposed method can achieve a better segmentation performance, in comparison with other state-of-the-art methods.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".