MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409060121 · doi:10.1109/tcsii.2025.3556846

Enhanced U-Net Architecture for Brain Tumor Localization and Segmentation in T1-Weighted MRI

2025· article· en· W4409060121 on OpenAlexafffund
Somayeh Davar, Thomas Fevens

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Circuits & Systems II Express Briefs · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicBrain Tumor Detection and Classification
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologies
KeywordsSegmentationArtificial intelligenceMagnetic resonance imagingComputer scienceNuclear medicineNuclear magnetic resonanceMedicinePhysicsRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Detection and segmentation of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) scans is a critical task in medical imaging, where achieving high segmentation precision and reliability remains challenging due to variations in tumor shape, size, intensity, and boundary definition across different MRI modalities. Recently, deep learning techniques have significantly improved the efficiency oflocalization and segmentation of various medical fields, including brain tumoursanalysis. This brief presents a novel two-stage approach for brain tumour segmentation in T1-weighted contrast-enhanced MRI (CE-MRI) scans, leveraging both YOLO (you only look once) and Modified U-Net. In the first stage, YOLO is employed to quickly and accurately localize regions of interest (ROIs) where brain tumours are present. To accelerate this step, YOLOv3 are incorporated, improving the computation speed and efficiency of the model. In the second stage, a modified U-NET model, enhanced with spatial and channel attention modules, is utilized to perform precise segmentation of the tumours within the identified ROIs. The performance of the proposed framework is evaluated using metrics including precision, recall, Jaccard index, and Dice similarity coefficient (DSC). Our approach demonstrates promising results compared to previous methods using the same database.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.938
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.244 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Circuits & Systems II Express BriefsSame topicBrain Tumor Detection and ClassificationFrench-language works237,207