MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Spatiotemporal Learning with Context-Aware Video Tubelets for Ultrasound Video Analysis

2025· article· en· W4410296174 on OpenAlexaff
Gary Y. Li, Li Chen, Bryson Hicks, Nikolai Schnittke, David Kessler, Jeffrey Shunp, Maria A. Parker, Cristiana Baloescu, Christopher Moore, Cynthia R. Gregory, Kenton W. Gregory, Balasundar I. Raju, Jochen Kruecker, Alvin Chen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Analysis and Summarization
Canadian institutionsColumbia College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceContext (archaeology)MultimediaVideo trackingVideo processingComputer visionArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Computer-aided pathology detection algorithms for video-based imaging modalities must accurately interpret complex spatiotemporal information by integrating findings across multiple frames. Current state-of-the-art methods operate by classifying on video sub-volumes (tubelets), but they often lose global spatial context by focusing only on local re-gions within detection ROIs. Here we propose a lightweight framework for tubelet -based object detection and video clas-sification that preserves both global spatial context and fine spatiotemporal features. To address the loss of global context, we embed tubelet location, size, and confidence as inputs to the classifier. Additionally, we use ROI -aligned feature maps from a pre-trained detection model, leveraging learned feature representations to increase the receptive field and reduce computational complexity. Our method is efficient, with the spatiotemporal tubelet classifier comprising only 0.4M parameters. We apply our approach to detect and classify lung consolidation and pleural effusion in ultrasound videos. Five-fold cross-validation on 14,804 videos from 828 patients shows our method outperforms previous tubelet-based approaches and is suited for real-time workflows.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.968
Threshold uncertainty score0.528

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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 topicVideo Analysis and SummarizationFrench-language works237,207