MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

SimICL: A Simple Visual In-context Learning Framework for Ultrasound Segmentation

2024· article· en· W4405489431 on OpenAlexaff
Yuyue Zhou, Banafshe Felfeliyan, Shrimanti Ghosh, Jessica Knight, Fatima Alves-Pereira, Christopher Keen, Jessica Küpper, Abhilash Rakkunedeth Hareendranathan, Jacob L. Jaremko

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMedical Image Segmentation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSimple (philosophy)SegmentationContext (archaeology)Artificial intelligenceComputer visionImage segmentationGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conventional deep learning models deal with images one-by-one, requiring costly and time-consuming expert labeling in the field of medical imaging, and domain-specific restriction limits model generalizability. Visual in-context learning (ICL) is a new and exciting area of research in computer vision. Unlike conventional deep learning, ICL emphasizes the model's ability to adapt to new tasks based on given examples quickly. Inspired by MAE-VQGAN, we proposed a new simple visual ICL method called SimICL, combining visual ICL pairing images with masked image modeling (MIM) designed for self-supervised learning. We validated our method on bony structures segmentation in a wrist ultrasound (US) dataset with limited annotations, where the clinical objective was to segment bony structures to help with further fracture detection. We used a test set containing 3822 images from 18 patients for bony region segmentation. SimICL achieved an remarkably high Dice coeffient (DC) of 0.96 and Jaccard Index (IoU) of 0.92, surpassing state-of-the-art segmentation and visual ICL models (a maximum DC 0.86 and IoU 0.76), with SimICL DC and IoU increasing by at least 0.10 and 0.16 respectively. This remarkably high agreement with limited manual annotations indicates SimICL could be used for training AI models even on small US datasets. This could dramatically decrease the human expert time required for image labeling compared to conventional approaches, and enhance the real-world use of AI assistance in US image analysis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.336 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMedical Image Segmentation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207