Pretraining of 3D image segmentation models for retinal OCT using denoising-based self-supervised learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deep learning algorithms have allowed the automation of segmentation for many biomarkers in retinal OCTs, enabling comprehensive clinical research and precise patient monitoring. These segmentation algorithms predominantly rely on supervised training and specialised segmentation networks, such as U-Nets. However, they require segmentation annotations, which are challenging to collect and require specialized expertise. In this paper, we explore leveraging 3D self-supervised learning based on image restoration techniques, that allow to pretrain 3D networks with the aim of improving segmentation performance. We test two methods, based on image restoration and denoising. After pretraining on a large 3D OCT dataset, we evaluate our weights by fine-tuning them on two challenging fluid segmentation datasets utilising different amount of training data. The chosen methods are easy to set up while providing large improvements for fluid segmentation, enabling the reduction of the amount of required annotation or an increase in the performance. Overall, the best results were obtained for denoising-based SSL methods, with higher results on both fluid segmentation datasets as well as faster pretraining durations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".