Artificial Intelligence Applied to a First Screening of Naevoid Melanoma: A New Use of Fast Random Forest Algorithm in Dermatopathology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Malignant melanoma (MM) is the "great mime" of dermatopathology, and it can present such rare variants that even the most experienced pathologist might miss or misdiagnose them. Naevoid melanoma (NM), which accounts for about 1% of all MM cases, is a constant challenge, and when it is not diagnosed in a timely manner, it can even lead to death. In recent years, artificial intelligence has revolutionised much of what has been achieved in the biomedical field, and what once seemed distant is now almost incorporated into the diagnostic therapeutic flow chart. In this paper, we present the results of a machine learning approach that applies a fast random forest (FRF) algorithm to a cohort of naevoid melanomas in an attempt to understand if and how this approach could be incorporated into the business process modelling and notation (BPMN) approach. The FRF algorithm provides an innovative approach to formulating a clinical protocol oriented toward reducing the risk of NM misdiagnosis. The work provides the methodology to integrate FRF into a mapped clinical process.
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 | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".