Automatic segmentation of the spinal cord nerve rootlets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".