MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Segmenting Cardiac Ultrasound Videos Using Self-Supervised Learning

2023· article· en· W4389576970 on OpenAlexaff
Erik S. Lamoureux, Sana Ayromlou, Seyedeh Neda Ahmadi Amiri, Helge Rhodin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Function and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeverage (statistics)Artificial intelligenceSegmentationComputer scienceEjection fractionDeep learningMarket segmentationMachine learningSemi-supervised learningRelevance (law)Pattern recognition (psychology)Supervised learningCardiac UltrasoundArtificial neural networkUltrasoundMedicineRadiologyCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep learning models trained with an insufficient volume of data can often fail to generalize between different equipment, clinics, and clinicians or fail to achieve acceptable performance. We improve cardiac ultrasound segmentation models using unlabeled data to learn recurrent anatomical representations via self-supervision. In addition, we leverage supervised local contrastive learning on sparse labels to improve the segmentation and reduce the need for large amounts of dense pixel-level supervisory annotations. Then, we implement supervised fine-tuning to segment key temporal anatomical features to estimate the cardiac Ejection Fraction (EF). We show that pretraining the network weights using self-supervised learning for subsequent supervised contrastive learning outperforms learning from scratch, validated using two state-of-the-art segmentation models, the DeepLabv3+ and Attention U-Net.Clinical relevance-This work has clinical relevance for assisting physicians when conducting cardiac function evaluations. We improve cardiac ejection fraction evaluation compared to previous methods, helping to alleviate the burden associated with acquiring labeled images.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.243 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCardiovascular Function and Risk FactorsFrench-language works237,207