Deep Learning for Detection and Localization of B-Lines in Lung Ultrasound
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lung ultrasound (LUS) is an important imaging modality used by emergency physicians to assess pulmonary congestion at the patient bedside. B-line artifacts in LUS videos are key findings associated with pulmonary congestion. Not only can the interpretation of LUS be challenging for novice operators, but visual quantification of B-lines remains subject to observer variability. In this work, we investigate the strengths and weaknesses of multiple deep learning approaches for automated B-line detection and localization in LUS videos. We curate and publish,BEDLUS, a new ultrasound dataset comprising 1,419 videos from 113 patients with a total of 15,755 expert-annotated B-lines. Based on this dataset, we present a benchmark of established deep learning methods applied to the task of B-line detection. To pave the way for interpretable quantification of B-lines, we propose a novel “single-point” approach to B-line localization using only the point of origin. Our results show that (a) the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve ranges from 0.864 to 0.955 for the benchmarked detection methods, (b) within this range, the best performance is achieved by models that leverage multiple successive frames as input, and (c) the proposed single-point approach for B-line localization reaches an F$_{1}$-score of 0.65, performing on par with the inter-observer agreement. The dataset and developed methods can facilitate further biomedical research on automated interpretation of lung ultrasound with the potential to expand the clinical utility.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".