Accurate drusen segmentation in optical coherence tomography via order-constrained regression of retinal layer heights
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drusen are an important biomarker for age-related macular degeneration (AMD). Their accurate segmentation based on optical coherence tomography (OCT) is therefore relevant to the detection, staging, and treatment of disease. Since manual OCT segmentation is resource-consuming and has low reproducibility, automatic techniques are required. In this work, we introduce a novel deep learning based architecture that directly predicts the position of layers in OCT and guarantees their correct order, achieving state-of-the-art results for retinal layer segmentation. In particular, the average absolute distance between our model's prediction and the ground truth layer segmentation in an AMD dataset is 0.63, 0.85, and 0.44 pixel for Bruch's membrane (BM), retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) and ellipsoid zone (EZ), respectively. Based on layer positions, we further quantify drusen load with excellent accuracy, achieving 0.994 and 0.988 Pearson correlation between drusen volumes estimated by our method and two human readers, and increasing the Dice score to 0.71 ± 0.16 (from 0.60 ± 0.23) and 0.62 ± 0.23 (from 0.53 ± 0.25), respectively, compared to a previous state-of-the-art method. Given its reproducible, accurate, and scalable results, our method can be used for the large-scale analysis of OCT data.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it