MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391506213 · doi:10.1162/imag_a_00218

Automatic segmentation of the spinal cord nerve rootlets

2024· preprint· en· W4391506213 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueImaging Neuroscience · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMedical Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustinePolytechnique MontréalMila - Quebec Artificial Intelligence Institute
FundersHORIZON EUROPE Framework ProgrammeNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaEuropean CommissionInstitut de Valorisation des DonnéesCraig H. Neilsen FoundationCanada First Research Excellence FundMinisterstvo Zdravotnictví Ceské Republiky
KeywordsSpinal cordSegmentationSørensen–Dice coefficientConvolutional neural networkCoefficient of variationMagnetic resonance imagingComputer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceMedicineImage segmentationNeuroscienceRadiologyPsychologyMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Precise identification of spinal nerve rootlets is relevant to delineate spinal levels for the study of functional activity in the spinal cord. The goal of this study was to develop an automatic method for the semantic segmentation of spinal nerve rootlets from T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans. Images from two open-access 3T MRI datasets were used to train a 3D multi-class convolutional neural network using an active learning approach to segment C2-C8 dorsal nerve rootlets. Each output class corresponds to a spinal level. The method was tested on 3T T2-weighted images from three datasets unseen during training to assess inter-site, inter-session, and inter-resolution variability. The test Dice score was 0.67 ± 0.16 (mean ± standard deviation across testing images and rootlets levels), suggesting a good performance. The method also demonstrated low inter-vendor and inter-site variability (coefficient of variation ≤ 1.41%), as well as low inter-session variability (coefficient of variation ≤ 1.30%), indicating stable predictions across different MRI vendors, sites, and sessions. The proposed methodology is open-source and readily available in the Spinal Cord Toolbox (SCT) v6.2 and higher.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.893
Threshold uncertainty score0.524

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.274 · 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