MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4409381755 · doi:10.1117/12.3063292

JS divergence Weibull embedding for very early breast cancer diagnosis

2025· article· en· W4409381755 on OpenAlexaff
Leonardo D. Buitrago, Christine Vassell, Miguel Martinez, Severin Vihossi, Harmen Siezen, Lan Ma, Xavier Maldague, Bardia Yousefi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGene expression and cancer classification
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeibull distributionBreast cancerDivergence (linguistics)EmbeddingComputer scienceCancerOncologyMedicineMathematicsInternal medicineStatisticsArtificial intelligencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dynamic thermography has emerged as a reliable adjunctive tool in breast cancer screening, complementing traditional methods such as mammography and clinical breast examination (CBE). Thermographic imaging, yielding thermal biomarkers termed thermomics, exhibits promise in identifying vasodilation within breast tissue, signaling potential abnormalities and lesions. Moreover, the observation of heterogeneous thermal patterns facilitates the detection of angiogenesis, the process of new blood vessel formation. This study investigates the application of thermal imaging biomarkers and thermographic imaging in breast cancer screening by applying Jensen‐Shannon (JS) divergence calculation on the low rank representation of thermal image sets obtained through Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection (UMAP) to select images best for feature extraction and employing Weibull embedding to highlight heterogenous patterns in the thermal sequences. The results are used to extract high‐dimensional thermomics and spectral clustering is used to reduce feature abundance. The model, trained with consistent hyperparameters across comparisons, demonstrated favorable preliminary performance in predicting abnormality. These optimal biomarkers have the potential to capture thermal heterogeneity effectively, thereby facilitating the early detection of breast cancer and serving as a non‐invasive aid to CBE.

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)0.004
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.293 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGene expression and cancer classification→French-language works237,207→