MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Automatic Lung Segmentation in Chest X-Ray Images using Dilated Dense-ResUNet

2024· article· en· W4400315292 on OpenAlexaff
Wiley Tam, Javad Alirezaie, Paul Babyn

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceLungSegmentationImage segmentationArtificial intelligenceComputer visionRadiologyMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Statistical evidence from the World Health Organization (WHO) has shown that lung diseases rank among the primary reasons for fatalities worldwide. With a lack of radiologists interpreting Chest X-Ray (CXR) images for common lung diseases, it becomes a challenge to diagnose lung diseases in a timely manner: Thus, Computer Assisted Diagnostic (CAD) tools can help expedite the procedure. Researchers have begun using deep learning techniques to efficiently analyze lungs in CXR images. To further improve the analysis of lungs, the lung regions can be segmented as a preliminary step. This paper aims to develop and test a lung segmentation model using a modified U-Net architecture. The architecture utilizes transfer learning with DenseNet201, dilated convolutions using a dilation rate of 2 and residual blocks. Numerous experiments were conducted to validate the efficacy of using ImageNet architectures and ImageNet weights on CXR images. Furthermore, different dilation rates were tested to determine the effects of configuring the receptive field. The model was trained using two datasets; Montgomery County (MC) CXR Dataset and Shenzhen Hospital (SH) CXR Dataset. The segmented lungs were evaluated using Jaccard Index (IoU) and Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC). Compared with results drawn from some of the current state-of-art methods, the proposed model achieves competitive results that has slightly higher IoU and DSC scores.

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 score0.962
Threshold uncertainty score0.654

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 topicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical ImagingFrench-language works237,207