MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377717228 · doi:10.1109/tnb.2023.3276867

Deep Learning Based Parameterization of Diffeomorphic Image Registration for Cardiac Image Segmentation

2023· article· en· W4377717228 on OpenAlexafffund
Ameneh Sheikhjafari, Deepa Krishnaswamy, Michelle Noga, Nilanjan Ray, Kumaradevan Punithakumar

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on NanoBioscience · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMedical Image Segmentation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersAlberta Innovates
KeywordsSegmentationArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceComputer visionDiffeomorphismImage segmentationHausdorff distanceTransformation (genetics)Pattern recognition (psychology)Geometric transformationImage registrationImage (mathematics)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cardiac segmentation from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is one of the essential tasks in analyzing the anatomy and function of the heart for the assessment and diagnosis of cardiac diseases. However, cardiac MRI generates hundreds of images per scan, and manual annotation of them is challenging and time-consuming, and therefore processing these images automatically is of interest. This study proposes a novel end-to-end supervised cardiac MRI segmentation framework based on a diffeomorphic deformable registration that can segment cardiac chambers from 2D and 3D images or volumes. To represent actual cardiac deformation, the method parameterizes the transformation using radial and rotational components computed via deep learning, with a set of paired images and segmentation masks used for training. The formulation guarantees transformations that are invertible and prevents mesh folding, which is essential for preserving the topology of the segmentation results. A physically plausible transformation is achieved by employing diffeomorphism in computing the transformations and activation functions that constrain the range of the radial and rotational components. The method was evaluated over three different data sets and showed significant improvements compared to exacting learning and non-learning based methods in terms of the Dice score and Hausdorff distance metrics.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.266 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations14
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on NanoBioscienceSame topicMedical Image Segmentation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207