Deep learning–enabled fluorescence imaging for surgical guidance: in silico training for oral cancer depth quantification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SignificanceOral cancer surgery requires accurate margin delineation to balance complete resection with post-operative functionality. Current in vivo fluorescence imaging systems provide two-dimensional margin assessment yet fail to quantify tumor depth prior to resection. Harnessing structured light in combination with deep learning (DL) may provide near real-time three-dimensional margin detection.AimA DL-enabled fluorescence spatial frequency domain imaging (SFDI) system trained with in silico tumor models was developed to quantify the depth of oral tumors.ApproachA convolutional neural network was designed to produce tumor depth and concentration maps from SFDI images. Three in silico representations of oral cancer lesions were developed to train the DL architecture: cylinders, spherical harmonics, and composite spherical harmonics (CSHs). Each model was validated with in silico SFDI images of patient-derived tongue tumors, and the CSH model was further validated with optical phantoms.ResultsThe performance of the CSH model was superior when presented with patient-derived tumors (P-value<0.05). The CSH model could predict depth and concentration within 0.4 mm and 0.4 μg/mL, respectively, for in silico tumors with depths less than 10 mm.ConclusionsA DL-enabled SFDI system trained with in silico CSH demonstrates promise in defining the deep margins of oral tumors.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".