3D U-Net with region of interest segmentation of kidneys and masses in computed tomography scans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CT-guided renal tumor ablations have been considered an alternative to treat small renal tumors, typically 4 cm in size or smaller, especially for patients who are ineligible to receive nephron-sparing surgery. For this procedure, the radiologist must compare the pre-operative with the post-operative CT to determine the presence of residual tumors. Distinguishing between malignant and benign kidney tumors poses a significant challenge. To automate this tumor coverage evaluation step and assist the radiologist in identifying kidney tumors, we proposed a coarse-to-fine U-Net-based model to segment kidneys and masses. We used the TotalSegmentator tool to obtain an approximate segmentation and region of interest of the kidneys, which was inputted into our 3D segmentation network trained using the nnUNet library to fully segment the kidneys and masses within them. Our model achieved an aggregated DICE score of 0.777 on testing data, and on local CT kidney data with tumors collected from the London Health Sciences University Hospital, our model achieved a DICE score of 0.7 for tumour segmentation. Our results indicate the model will be useful for tumour identification and evaluation.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".