Large medical image database impact on generalizability of synthetic CT scan generation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study systematically examines the impact of training database size and the generalizability of deep learning models for synthetic medical image generation. Specifically, we employ a Cycle-Consistency Generative Adversarial Network (CycleGAN) with softly paired data to synthesize kilovoltage computed tomography (kVCT) images from megavoltage computed tomography (MVCT) scans. Unlike previous works, which were constrained by limited data availability, our study uses an extensive database comprising 4,000 patient CT scans, an order of magnitude larger than prior research, allowing for a more rigorous assessment of database size in medical image translation. We quantitatively evaluate the fidelity of the generated synthetic images using established image similarity metrics, including Mean Absolute Error (MAE) and Structural Similarity Index Measure (SSIM). Beyond assessing image quality, we investigate the model's capacity for generalization by analyzing its performance across diverse patient subgroups, considering factors such as sex, age, and anatomical region. This approach enables a more granular understanding of how dataset composition influences model robustness.
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 | 0.009 | 0.048 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".