MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Overlapping Cervical Cell Region Segmentation

2024· article· en· W4401073399 on OpenAlexaff
Shaad Fazal, Richard M. Dansereau

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSegmentationComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceImage segmentationComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep learning algorithms have made phenomenal inroads into the domain of medical image formation and analysis, including in segmentation of cervical cell cytology images. Cervical cancer is one of the most common cancers affecting women worldwide. Medical imaging plays a pivotal role in the detection and diagnosis of cervical cancer. Segmentation of overlapping cells is one of the major challenges in analyzing these images owing to varying contrast of cell cytoplasm and wide range of cell overlap ratios. The next step in this domain is to segment the overlapped portion of cervical cells in order to harness the full scope of cellular information. We propose to adopt the Meta-Polyp segmentation method for our task which combines the MetaFormer baseline model elements such as the neural network transformers with U-Net architecture with some minor tweaks in hyperparameters. The Meta-Polyp neural network is able to capture the overlapped region of cervical cells to an extent. We then refine our segmentation results by applying a modified U-Net neural network which employs transfer learning in its encoder stage to get the final segmentation masks. Using this novel deep learning image segmentation pipeline we get accurate results for the segmentation of overlapped region of cervical cells.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAI in cancer detectionFrench-language works237,207