MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4353015179 · doi:10.1038/s41592-023-02150-0

Understanding metric-related pitfalls in image analysis validation

2024· review· en· W4353015179 on OpenAlexafffund
Annika Reinke, Minu D. Tizabi, Michael Baumgartner, Matthias Eisenmann, Doreen Heckmann-Nötzel, Ali Emre Kavur, Tim Rädsch, Carole H. Sudre, Laura Ación, Michela Antonelli, Tal Arbel, Spyridon Bakas, Arriel Benis, Florian Buettner, M. Jorge Cardoso, Veronika Cheplygina, Jianxu Chen, Evangelia Christodoulou, Beth A. Cimini, Keyvan Farahani, Luciana Ferrer, Adrián Galdrán, Bram van Ginneken, Ben Glocker, Patrick Godau, Daniel A. Hashimoto, Michael M. Hoffman, Merel Huisman, Fabian Isensee, Pierre Jannin, Charles E. Kahn, Dagmar Kainmueller, Bernhard Kainz, Alexandros Karargyris, Jens Kleesiek, Florian Kofler, Thijs Kooi, Annette Kopp‐Schneider, Michal Kozubek, Anna Kreshuk, Tahsin Kurç, Bennett A. Landman, Geert Litjens, Amin Madani, Klaus Maier‐Hein, Anne L. Martel, Erik Meijering, Bjoern Menze, Karel G. M. Moons, Henning Müller, Brennan Nichyporuk, Felix Nickel, Jens Petersen, Susanne M. Rafelski, Mauricio Reyes, Michael A. Riegler, Nicola Rieke, Julio Sáez-Rodríguez, Clara I. Sá‎nchez, Shravya Shetty, Ronald M. Summers, Abdel Aziz Taha, Aleksei Tiulpin, Sotirios A. Tsaftaris, Ben Van Calster, Gaël Varoquaux, Ziv Yaniv, Paul F. Jäger, Lena Maier‐Hein

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Methods · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreVector InstitutePrincess Margaret Cancer CentreMila - Quebec Artificial Intelligence InstituteUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkMcGill University
FundersNational Cancer InstituteCentre For Medical Engineering, King’s College LondonEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSydäntutkimussäätiöNational Institute of General Medical SciencesBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekCancer Research UKWellcome TrustInnosuisse - Schweizerische Agentur für InnovationsförderungAlzheimer's SocietyNIH Clinical CenterAgence Nationale de la RechercheSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungOulun YliopistoSilicon Valley Community FoundationEuropean CommissionNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchRoyal Academy of EngineeringNovo Nordisk FondenFoundation for Cardiovascular ResearchNational Science Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceData scienceMultidisciplinary approachStrengths and weaknessesBridging (networking)Metric (unit)Process (computing)Key (lock)Information retrievalArtificial intelligenceData miningPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.047
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.047
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.514
Teacher spread0.410 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
DomainMethods
GenreReview

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

Citations175
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueNature MethodsSame topicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical ImagingFrench-language works237,207