MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4386937850 · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-43950-6_3

Deriving Physiological Information from PET Images Using Machine Learning

2023· book-chapter· en· W4386937850 on OpenAlexaff
Olfa Gassara, Belkacem Chikhaoui, Rostom Mabrouk, Shengrui Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueLecture notes in computer science · 2023
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsBishop's UniversityUniversité TÉLUQUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmComputer scienceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Machine learning (ML) algorithms have become popular in recent years and have found increasing utility in the field of medical imaging, specifically in positron emission tomography (PET) imaging. The interest in ML in PET imaging for the study of neurodegenerative diseases stems from the potential of these techniques to analyze and predict the physiological parameters of biomarkers such as the total volume of distribution (V $$_{\text {t}}$$ t ) in the organ or a structure of the organ to be explored. In this paper, we investigated whether the V $$_{\text {t}}$$ t of [ $$^{18}$$ 18 F]-FEPPA radiotracer, an indicator of neuroinflammation, could be estimated directly in a non-invasive way, given the activity of the radiotracer in brain tissue. The study used several regression models to predict the [ $$^{18}$$ 18 F]-FEPPA V $$_{\text {t}}$$ t in different brain regions where 31 regions of interest were defined for each of 24 patients with Parkinson disease and 20 healthy subjects, and were used to train four tree-based regression models. The predicted and reference values were compared by Bland-Altman analysis and regression model’s performance was evaluated by the mean absolute error (MAE). The best result was obtained by the XGBoost model with a MAE of 2.6. Bland-Altman analysis results indicate that predicted V $$_{\text {t}}$$ t are in average very close to the reference with a bias of 0.23 "Image missing" 2.82. Significant main effect of genotype on [ $$^{18}$$ 18 F]-FEPPA in both caudate and putamen have been preserved by predicted Vt values (p < 0.05). The results of paired t-test indicate that the difference between predicted and reference V $$_{\text {t}}$$ t is not statistically significant in 6 out of 8 groups. The proposed algorithms provide a non-invasive and efficient tool to predict [ $$^{18}$$ 18 F]-FEPPA V $$_{\text {t}}$$ t values, a hallmark of neuroinflammation that is believed to be a potential trigger for Parkinson’s disease development.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLecture notes in computer science→Same topicMedical Imaging Techniques and Applications→French-language works237,207→