Effect of Intensity Standardization on Deep Learning for WML Segmentation in Multi-Centre FLAIR MRI
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deep learning (DL) methods for white matter lesion (WML) segmentation in MRI suffer a reduction in performance when applied on data from a scanner or centre that is out-of-distribution (OOD) from the training data. This is critical for translation and widescale adoption, since current models cannot be readily applied to data from new institutions. In this work, we evaluate several intensity standardization methods for MRI as a preprocessing step for WML segmentation in multi-centre Fluid-Attenuated Inversion Recovery (FLAIR) MRI. We evaluate a method specifically developed for FLAIR MRI called IAMLAB along with other popular normalization techniques such as White-strip, Nyul and Z-score. We proposed an Ensemble model that combines predictions from each of these models. A skip-connection UNet (SC UNet) was trained on the standardized images, as well as the original data and segmentation performance was evaluated over several dimensions. The training (in-distribution) data consists of a single study, of 60 volumes, and the test (OOD) data is 128 unseen volumes from three clinical cohorts. Results show IAMLAB and Ensemble provide higher WML segmentation performance compared to models from original data or other normalization methods. IAMLAB & Ensemble have the highest dice similarity coefficient (DSC) on the in-distribution data (0.78 & 0.80) and on clinical OOD data. DSC was significantly higher for IAMLAB compared to the original data (p<0.05) for all lesion categories (LL>25mL: 0.77 vs. 0.71; 10mL<= LL<25mL: 0.66 vs. 0.61; LL<10mL: 0.53 vs. 0.52). The IAMLAB and Ensemble normalization methods are mitigating MRI domain shift and are optimal for DL-based WML segmentation in unseen FLAIR 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.
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 | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".