MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404394935 · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e40452

Deep learning-driven macroscopic AI segmentation model for brain tumor detection via digital pathology: Foundations for terahertz imaging-based AI diagnostics

2024· article· en· W4404394935 on OpenAlexaff
Myeong Suk Yim, Y. H. Kim, Hyeon Sang Bark, Seung Jae Oh, Inhee Maeng, Jin‐Kyoung Shim, Jong Hee Chang, Seok‐Gu Kang, Byeong Cheol Yoo, Jang-Woo Kwon, Jungsup Byun, Woon-Ha Yeo, Seunghwan Jung, Han‐Cheol Ryu, Se Hoon Kim, Hyun Ju Choi, Young Bin Ji

Bibliographic record

VenueHeliyon · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicBrain Tumor Detection and Classification
Canadian institutionsNexen (Canada)
FundersInstitute for Information and Communications Technology PromotionMinistry of Science and ICT, South KoreaChungnam National University HospitalGwangju Institute of Science and Technology
KeywordsTerahertz radiationArtificial intelligenceDeep learningSegmentationDigital pathologyNeuroimagingMedical imagingComputer scienceBiomedical engineeringNeuroscienceMedicinePhysicsOpticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We used deep learning methods to develop an AI model capable of autonomously delineating cancerous regions in digital pathology images (H&E-stained images). By using a transgenic brain tumor model derived from the TS13-64 brain tumor cell line, we digitized a total of 187 H&E-stained images and annotated the cancerous regions in these images to compile a dataset. A deep learning approach was executed through DEEP:PHI, which abstracts Python coding complexities, thereby simplifying the execution of AI training protocols for users. By employing the Image Crop with Mask technique and patch generation method, we not only maintained an appropriate data class balance but also overcame the challenge of limited computing resources. This approach enabled us to successfully develop an AI training model that autonomously segments cancerous areas. This AI model enables the provision of guiding images for determining cancerous areas with minimal assistance from neuropathologists. In addition, the high-quality, large dataset curated for training using the proposed approach contributes to the development of novel terahertz imaging-based AI cancer diagnosis technologies and accelerates technological advancements.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score0.837

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.284 · 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.

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

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHeliyonSame topicBrain Tumor Detection and ClassificationFrench-language works237,207