Unleashing the strengths of unlabelled data in deep learning-assisted pan-cancer abdominal organ quantification: the FLARE22 challenge
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deep learning has shown great potential to automate abdominal organ segmentation and quantification. However, most existing algorithms rely on expert annotations and do not have comprehensive evaluations in real-world multinational settings. To address these limitations, we organised the FLARE 2022 challenge to benchmark fast, low-resource, and accurate abdominal organ segmentation algorithms. We first constructed an intercontinental abdomen CT dataset from more than 50 clinical research groups. We then independently validated that deep learning algorithms achieved a median dice similarity coefficient (DSC) of 90·0% (IQR 87·4-91·3%) by use of 50 labelled images and 2000 unlabelled images, which can substantially reduce manual annotation costs. The best-performing algorithms successfully generalised to holdout external validation sets, achieving a median DSC of 89·4% (85·2-91·3%), 90·0% (84·3-93·0%), and 88·5% (80·9-91·9%) on North American, European, and Asian cohorts, respectively. These algorithms show the potential to use unlabelled data to boost performance and alleviate annotation shortages for modern artificial intelligence models.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".