MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407490144 · doi:10.1117/12.3045625

Adaptive region-oriented masked vision retentive network for predicting macrovascular invasion in hepatocellular carcinoma

2025· article· en· W4407490144 on OpenAlexaff
Kengo Takahashi, Ryusei Inamori, Kei Ichiji, Zhang Zhang, Zeng Yuwen, Noriyasu Homma

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicBrain Tumor Detection and Classification
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHepatocellular carcinomaComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMedicineCancer research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of the present study was to develop the Adaptive Region-Oriented Masked Vision Retentive Network (AROMA ViR) model, which can efficiently learn the morphological structures of the liver, to predict macrovascular invasion (MI) in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Retrospective CT images were obtained from the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, in accordance with The Cancer Imaging Archive data usage policy and restrictions. The image dataset comprised 51,968 slices taken during the arterial phase in 105 patients with HCC. We split the data patient-wise into training, validation, and test datasets in a 6:2:2 ratio after applying specific exclusion criteria. The AROMA ViR was designed to enhance the relevant areas in the retention map by incorporating spatial information for liver parenchyma, tumor, and portal vein. The model applied causal masks specialized for specific liver shapes for each slice image into retention encoders. We compared the proposed model with Residual Network 101, Vision Transformer, and Vision Retentive Network. We calculated the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC) and that under the precision recall curve (AUC-PR). We also obtained accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and F1-score using Youden’s index. AROMA ViR pretrained by ImageNet showed AUC-ROC of 0.860, AUC-PR of 0.790, accuracy of 0.853, sensitivity of 0.719, specificity of 0.902, and F1 score of 0.578.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.633
Threshold uncertainty score0.640

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBrain Tumor Detection and ClassificationFrench-language works237,207