MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398132366 · doi:10.1002/ima.23097

Comprehensive evaluation of a new automatic scoring system for cleanliness assessment in video capsule endoscopy

2024· article· en· W4398132366 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Palak Handa, Nidhi Goel, S. Indu, Deepak Gunjan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Imaging Systems and Technology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastrointestinal Bleeding Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersScience and Engineering Research Board
KeywordsCapsule endoscopyComputer scienceCapsuleComputer visionVideo recordingEndoscopyArtificial intelligenceRadiologyComputer graphics (images)MedicineGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A reliable, quick‐to‐assess, and automatic scoring system for cleanliness assessment in video capsule endoscopy (VCE) is presently not available. The present study proposes an approach to automatically assess the cleanliness in VCE frames as per the latest scoring system, that is, Korea‐Canada (KODA). First, a new multi‐label frame dataset containing medical scores of 28 VCE videos was generated through the proposed mobile‐based application called Artificial Intelligence‐KODA (AI‐KODA) score. The scores were saved automatically in real‐time through the application. The generated dataset was transformed into three datasets based on the scores, and each of the dataset was then randomly split into train:validate:test ratio of 60:20:20. Second, a comprehensive evaluation, interpretation, and benchmarking of the three classification tasks were performed with the help of eight transfer learning algorithms on NVIDIA RTX A5000 workstation. Thorough analysis indicates that AI‐KODA utilized with AI is reliable, quick‐to‐access, and free from observer bias. It promotes automatic scoring system for cleanliness assessment in VCE. The meta‐data is available here ( link ).

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Imaging Systems and TechnologySame topicGastrointestinal Bleeding Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207