CASCADE-FSL: Few-shot learning for collateral evaluation in ischemic stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Assessing collateral circulation is essential in determining the best treatment for ischemic stroke patients as good collaterals lead to different treatment options, i.e., thrombectomy, whereas poor collaterals can adversely affect the treatment by leading to excess bleeding and eventually death. To reduce inter- and intra-rater variability and save time in radiologist assessments, computer-aided methods, mainly using deep neural networks, have gained popularity. The current literature demonstrates effectiveness when using balanced and extensive datasets in deep learning; however, such data sets are scarce for stroke, and the number of data samples for poor collateral cases is often limited compared to those for good collaterals. We propose a novel approach called CASCADE-FSL to distinguish poor collaterals effectively. Using a small, unbalanced data set, we employ a few-shot learning approach for training using a 2D ResNet-50 as a backbone and designating good and intermediate cases as two normal classes. We identify poor collaterals as anomalies in comparison to the normal classes. Our novel approach achieves an overall accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of 0.88, 0.88, and 0.89, respectively, demonstrating its effectiveness in addressing the imbalanced dataset challenge and accurately identifying poor collateral circulation cases. • Collateral assessment in ischemic stroke using few-shot learning. • Developed a deep learning method for stroke collateral analysis in small datasets. • Poor collateral cases detected as anomalies that can adversely affect the treatment without using them during training. • Proposed method reduces rater variability and support treatment planning in clinical settings.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".