MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4362486869 · doi:10.1117/12.2654104

Self-supervised learning and uncertainty estimation for surgical margin detection

2023· article· en· W4362486869 on OpenAlexaff
Ayesha Syeda, Fahimeh Fooladgar, Amoon Jamzad, Dilakshan Srikanthan, Martin Kaufmann, Kevin Ren, Jay Engel, Ross Walker, Shaila J. Merchant, Doug McKay, Sonal Varma, Gábor Fichtinger, John F. Rudan, Parvin Mousavi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMachine learningMargin (machine learning)AutoencoderSupervised learningDeep learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Up to 35% of breast-conserving surgeries fail to resect all the tumors completely. Ideally, machine learning methods using the iKnife data, which uses Rapid Evaporative Ionization Mass Spectrometry (REIMS), can be utilized to predict tissue type in real-time during surgery, resulting in better tumor resections. As REIMS data is heterogeneous and weakly labeled, and datasets are often small, model performance and reliability can be adversely affected. Self-supervised training and uncertainty estimation of the prediction can be used to mitigate these challenges by learning the signatures of input data without their label as well as including predictive confidence in output reporting. We first design an autoencoder model using a reconstruction pretext task as a self-supervised pretraining step without considering tissue type. Next, we construct our uncertainty-aware classifier using the encoder part of the model with Masksembles layers to estimate the uncertainty associated with its predictions. The pretext task was trained on 190 burns collected from 34 patients from Basal Cell Carcinoma iKnife data. The model was further trained on breast cancer data comprising of 200 burns collected from 15 patients. Our proposed model shows improvement in sensitivity and uncertainty metrics of 10% and 15.7% over the baseline, respectively. The proposed strategies lead to improvements in uncertainty calibration and overall performance, toward reducing the likelihood of incomplete resection, supporting removal of minimal non-neoplastic tissue, and improved model reliability during surgery. Future work will focus on further testing the model on intraoperative data and additional exvivo data following collection of more breast samples.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.253 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAI in cancer detectionFrench-language works237,207