MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Wound Semantic Segmentation Framework with Encoder-Decoder Architecture

2024· article· en· W4402674311 on OpenAlexaff
Wenda Jiang, Zhen Gao, Wael Brahim

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceEncoderArchitectureSegmentationArtificial intelligenceImage segmentation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Medical Image Segmentation Framework (MISEG) is proposed on this study to efficiently streamline the image segmentation challenge in the medical fields. While many existing study related to the medical image segmentation are focusing on the algorithms of accurate segmentation, we expanded our scope to integrate the life cycle of machine learning into medical image segmentation. Under the proposed MISEG framework, we leveraged the Encoder-Decoder model to participate the recent DFUC2022 foot ulcer image segmentation challenge. In this challenge, we have recorded an outstanding accuracy of 0.7501 in IoU score, despite only utilizing 80% of the training data.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.611
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.476
Teacher spread0.382 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicArtificial Intelligence in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207