MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392111888 · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e26872

Regional choroidal thickness estimation from color fundus images based on convolutional neural networks

2024· article· en· W4392111888 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Yibiao Rong, Qifeng Chen, Zehua Jiang, Zhun Fan, Haoyu Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueHeliyon · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersShantou Science and Technology ProjectNatural Science Foundation of Guangdong ProvinceSt. Thomas UniversityScience and Technology Planning Project of Guangdong ProvinceShantou University
KeywordsConvolutional neural networkMean absolute errorFundus (uterus)Mean absolute percentage errorArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceCorrelation coefficientOptical coherence tomographyApproximation errorArtificial neural networkTask (project management)MathematicsPattern recognition (psychology)AlgorithmMean squared errorOphthalmologyStatisticsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose This study aims to estimate the regional choroidal thickness from color fundus images from convolutional neural networks in different network structures and task learning models. Method 1276 color fundus photos and their corresponding choroidal thickness values from healthy subjects were obtained from the Topcon DRI Triton optical coherence tomography machine. Initially, ten commonly used convolutional neural networks were deployed to identify the most accurate model, which was subsequently selected for further training. This selected model was then employed in combination with single-, multiple-, and auxiliary-task training models to predict the average and sub-region choroidal thickness in both ETDRS (Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study) grids and 100-grid subregions. The values of mean absolute error and coefficient of determination (R 2 ) were involved to evaluate the models' performance. Results Efficientnet-b0 network outperformed other networks with the lowest mean absolute error value (25.61 μm) and highest R 2 (0.7817) in average choroidal thickness. Incorporating diopter spherical, anterior chamber depth, and lens thickness as auxiliary tasks improved predicted accuracy (p-value = 6.39 × 10 − 44 , 2.72 × 10 − 38 , 1.15 × 10 − 36 respectively). For ETDRS regional choroidal thickness estimation, multi-task model achieved better results than single task model (lowest mean absolute error = 31.10 μm vs. 33.20 μm). The multi-task training also can simultaneously predict the choroidal thickness of 100 grids with a minimum mean absolute error of 33.86 μm. Conclusions Efficientnet-b0, in combination with multi-task and auxiliary task models, achieve high accuracy in estimating average and regional macular choroidal thickness directly from color fundus photographs.

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 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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.289
Threshold uncertainty score0.508

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHeliyonSame topicRetinal Imaging and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207