MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4301934633

Optic cup segmentation: type-II fuzzy thresholding approach and blood vessel extraction

2017· article· en· W4301934633 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
A Almazroa, S Alodhayb, K Raahemifar, Vasudevan Lakshminarayanan

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThresholdingSegmentationArtificial intelligenceExtraction (chemistry)Computer visionComputer scienceFuzzy logicPattern recognition (psychology)Image (mathematics)ChromatographyChemistry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ahmed Almazroa,1 Sami Alodhayb,2 Kaamran Raahemifar,3 Vasudevan Lakshminarayanan1 1School of Optometry and Vision Science, University of Waterloo, Canada; 2Binrushd Ophthalmic Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia; 3Department of Electrical Engineering, Ryerson University, Toronto, Canada Abstract: We introduce here a new technique for segmenting optic cup using two-dimensional fundus images. Cup segmentation is the most challenging part of image processing of the optic nerve head due to the complexity of its structure. Using the blood vessels to segment the cup is important. Here, we report on blood vessel extraction using first a top-hat transform and Otsu’s segmentation function to detect the curves in the blood vessels (kinks) which indicate the cup boundary. This was followed by an interval type-II fuzzy entropy procedure. Finally, the Hough transform was applied to approximate the cup boundary. The algorithm was evaluated on 550 fundus images from a large dataset, which contained three different sets of images, where the cup was manually marked by six ophthalmologists. On one side, the accuracy of the algorithm was tested on the three image sets independently. The final cup detection accuracy in terms of area and centroid was calculated to be 78.2% of 441 images. Finally, we compared the algorithm performance with manual markings done by the six ophthalmologists. The agreement was determined between the ophthalmologists as well as the algorithm. The best agreement was between ophthalmologists one, two and five in 398 of 550 images, while the algorithm agreed with them in 356 images. Keywords: optic cup, image segmentation, glaucoma, blood vessel kinks, fuzzy type-II thresholding, retinal fundus images, optic disk

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.262
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.256
GPT teacher head0.568
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicRetinal Imaging and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207