MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4368282560 · doi:10.47611/jsrhs.v12i1.3910

Finding the Most Effective Data Augmentation Techniques on Brain MRI Data Using Deep Networks

2023· article· en· W4368282560 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Nishank Raisinghani, Mason McGill

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Student Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicBrain Tumor Detection and Classification
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsMagnetic resonance imagingMedicineCognitionData setComputer scienceNoise (video)Set (abstract data type)GliomaArtificial intelligenceRadiologyNeurosciencePsychologyImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2020, over 250,000 people died from brain and Central Nervous System (CNS) tumors. Brain tumors account for around 85% or more of these. As of 2021, over 16 million people in the United States have been diagnosed with some type of cognitive impairment. The goal of this paper is to find the most effective set of data augmentations to correctly classify cognitive diseases with deep networks, using structural Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) data. This paper demonstrates a Greedy optimization technique to find the most effective sequence of data augmentations out of blurring, distortion, position, and red noise (an overlay augmentation displaying random clouds of noise on the images). We sought to classify 3 tumors: glioma tumors, pituitary tumors, and meningioma tumors, as well as detect if there was no tumor at all. We also classified 3 stages of Alzheimer's disease: not demented, very mildly demented, and mildly demented, to further demonstrate the effectiveness of the data augmentation sequence.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.673
Threshold uncertainty score0.522

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.475
GPT teacher head0.539
Teacher spread0.065 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Student ResearchSame topicBrain Tumor Detection and ClassificationFrench-language works237,207