MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4395079861 · doi:10.18280/ria.380231

Dental Caries Detection Using Neural Turing Machines (NTM) and High Intensity Color Detection (NTM-HICD) Model

2024· article· en· W4395079861 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sunkara Naga Sindhu, Raavi Satya Prasad

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue d intelligence artificielle · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Radiography and Imaging
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceArtificial neural networkPattern recognition (psychology)Medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dental cavities, caries, or tooth decay are prevalent oral health concerns worldwide.This research proposes an automated approach for dental cavities detection utilizing a Neural Turing Machines (NTM) and High Intensity Color Detection (NTM-HICD) model.These two models process the input samples in a sequence order.NTM is a type of artificial neural network (ANN) architecture that combines neural networks with external memory structures.NTM mainly designed to mimic the ability of a Turing machine to read the interesting patterns from various disease detection.The proposed NTM-HICD system combines the strengths of multiple deep learning algorithms to enhance the accuracy and robustness of dental cavity detection.The design incorporates three primary components: image processing, feature extraction, and classification.Firstly, dental X-rays are processed to enhance the quality of input data.A pre-trained model DeepLabV3+ is used to train on dental dataset.The images are then subjected to effected region extraction to focus on the tooth areas for more targeted analysis.Secondly, a set of diverse feature extraction techniques is applied to capture comprehensive information from the effected regions.Lastly, an ensemble of classifiers, such as support vector machines (SVM), random forests (RF), and deep neural networks (DNN), is employed to leverage the individual strengths of each classifier.The fusion of multiple classifiers allows for improved generalization and enhanced detection performance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueRevue d intelligence artificielleSame topicDental Radiography and ImagingFrench-language works237,207