MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4406254866 · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-85632-9

Improving spleen segmentation in ultrasound images using a hybrid deep learning framework

2025· article· en· W4406254866 on OpenAlexaff
Ali Karimi, Javad Seraj, Fatemeh Mirzadeh Sarcheshmeh, Kasra Fazli, Amirali Seraj, Parisa Eslami, Mohamadreza Khanmohamadi, Helia Sajjadian Moosavi, Hadi Ghattan Kashani, Abdoulreza Sajjadian Moosavi, Masoud Shariat Panahi

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSegmentationArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceAutoencoderPattern recognition (psychology)Intersection (aeronautics)Deep learningNoise (video)Image (mathematics)CartographyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper introduces a novel method for spleen segmentation in ultrasound images, using a two-phase training approach. In the first phase, the SegFormerB0 network is trained to provide an initial segmentation. In the second phase, the network is further refined using the Pix2Pix structure, which enhances attention to details and corrects any erroneous or additional segments in the output. This hybrid method effectively combines the strengths of both SegFormer and Pix2Pix to produce highly accurate segmentation results. We have assembled the Spleenex dataset, consisting of 450 ultrasound images of the spleen, which is the first dataset of its kind in this field. Our method has been validated on this dataset, and the experimental results show that it outperforms existing state-of-the-art models. Specifically, our approach achieved a mean Intersection over Union (mIoU) of 94.17% and a mean Dice (mDice) score of 96.82%, surpassing models such as Splenomegaly Segmentation Network (SSNet), U-Net, and Variational autoencoder based methods. The proposed method also achieved a Mean Percentage Length Error (MPLE) of 3.64%, further demonstrating its accuracy. Furthermore, the proposed method has demonstrated strong performance even in the presence of noise in ultrasound images, highlighting its practical applicability in clinical environments.

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)0.001
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.349 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education→French-language works237,207→