MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400642757 · doi:10.1002/mp.17291

Unsupervised shape‐and‐texture‐based generative adversarial tuning of pre‐trained networks for carotid segmentation from 3D ultrasound images

2024· article· en· W4400642757 on OpenAlexaff
Zhaozheng Chen, Mingjie Jiang, Bernard Chiu

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Physics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
FundersInnovation and Technology CommissionResearch Grants Council, University Grants CommitteeCity University of Hong Kong
KeywordsSegmentationArtificial intelligenceDiscriminatorComputer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Convolutional neural networkComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Vessel‐wall volume and localized three‐dimensional ultrasound (3DUS) metrics are sensitive to the change of carotid atherosclerosis in response to medical/dietary interventions. Manual segmentation of the media‐adventitia boundary (MAB) and lumen‐intima boundary (LIB) required to obtain these metrics is time‐consuming and prone to observer variability. Although supervised deep‐learning segmentation models have been proposed, training of these models requires a sizeable manually segmented training set, making larger clinical studies prohibitive. Purpose We aim to develop a method to optimize pre‐trained segmentation models without requiring manual segmentation to supervise the fine‐tuning process. Methods We developed an adversarial framework called the unsupervised shape‐and‐texture generative adversarial network (USTGAN) to fine‐tune a convolutional neural network (CNN) pre‐trained on a source dataset for accurate segmentation of a target dataset. The network integrates a novel texture‐based discriminator with a shape‐based discriminator, which together provide feedback for the CNN to segment the target images in a similar way as the source images. The texture‐based discriminator increases the accuracy of the CNN in locating the artery, thereby lowering the number of failed segmentations. Failed segmentation was further reduced by a self‐checking mechanism to flag longitudinal discontinuity of the artery and by self‐correction strategies involving surface interpolation followed by a case‐specific tuning of the CNN. The U‐Net was pre‐trained by the source dataset involving 224 3DUS volumes with 136, 44, and 44 volumes in the training, validation and testing sets. The training of USTGAN involved the same training group of 136 volumes in the source dataset and 533 volumes in the target dataset. No segmented boundaries for the target cohort were available for training USTGAN. The validation and testing of USTGAN involved 118 and 104 volumes from the target cohort, respectively. The segmentation accuracy was quantified by Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC), and incorrect localization rate (ILR). Tukey's Honestly Significant Difference multiple comparison test was employed to quantify the difference of DSCs between models and settings, where was considered statistically significant. Results USTGAN attained a DSC of % in LIB and % in MAB, improving from the baseline performance of % in LIB (p ) and % in MAB (p ). Our approach outperformed six state‐of‐the‐art domain‐adaptation models (MAB: , LIB: ). The proposed USTGAN also had the lowest ILR among the methods compared (LIB: 2.5%, MAB: 1.7%). Conclusion Our framework improves segmentation generalizability, thereby facilitating efficient carotid disease monitoring in multicenter trials and in clinics with less expertise in 3DUS imaging.

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)0.003
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.256 · 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
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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical PhysicsSame topicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery DiseasesFrench-language works237,207