MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393999740 · doi:10.1038/s41598-024-58283-5

Advanced disk herniation computer aided diagnosis system

2024· article· en· W4393999740 on OpenAlexaff
Maad Ebrahim, Mohammad Alsmirat, Mahmoud Al‐Ayyoub

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMedical Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceConcatenation (mathematics)Feature (linguistics)Computer-aidedSet (abstract data type)Machine learningArtificial intelligenceImage (mathematics)Computer-aided diagnosisResource (disambiguation)Data miningPattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over recent years, researchers and practitioners have encountered massive and continuous improvements in the computational resources available for their use. This allowed the use of resource-hungry Machine learning (ML) algorithms to become feasible and practical. Moreover, several advanced techniques are being used to boost the performance of such algorithms even further, which include various transfer learning techniques, data augmentation, and feature concatenation. Normally, the use of these advanced techniques highly depends on the size and nature of the dataset being used. In the case of fine-grained medical image sets, which have subcategories within the main categories in the image set, there is a need to find the combination of the techniques that work the best on these types of images. In this work, we utilize these advanced techniques to find the best combinations to build a state-of-the-art lumber disc herniation computer-aided diagnosis system. We have evaluated the system extensively and the results show that the diagnosis system achieves an accuracy of 98% when it is compared with human diagnosis.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.725
Threshold uncertainty score0.366

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicMedical Imaging and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207