MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401304041 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2407.20461

Weakly Supervised Intracranial Hemorrhage Segmentation with YOLO and an Uncertainty Rectified Segment Anything Model

2024· preprint· en· W4401304041 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Pascal Spiegler, Amirhossein Rasoulian, Yiming Xiao

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicBrain Tumor Detection and Classification
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSegmentationArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) is a life-threatening condition that requires rapid and accurate diagnosis to improve treatment outcomes and patient survival rates. Recent advancements in supervised deep learning have greatly improved the analysis of medical images, but often rely on extensive datasets with high-quality annotations, which are costly, time-consuming, and require medical expertise to prepare. To mitigate the need for large amounts of expert-prepared segmentation data, we have developed a novel weakly supervised ICH segmentation method that utilizes the YOLO object detection model and an uncertainty-rectified Segment Anything Model (SAM). In addition, we have proposed a novel point prompt generator for this model to further improve segmentation results with YOLO-predicted bounding box prompts. Our approach achieved a high accuracy of 0.933 and an AUC of 0.796 in ICH detection, along with a mean Dice score of 0.629 for ICH segmentation, outperforming existing weakly supervised and popular supervised (UNet and Swin-UNETR) approaches. Overall, the proposed method provides a robust and accurate alternative to the more commonly used supervised techniques for ICH quantification without requiring refined segmentation ground truths during model training.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.277
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.140 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicBrain Tumor Detection and ClassificationFrench-language works237,207