MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410766751 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0322048

A new dataset for measuring the performance of blood vessel segmentation methods under distribution shifts

2025· article· en· W4410766751 on OpenAlexaff
Matheus Viana da Silva, Natália de Carvalho Santos, Julie Ouellette, Baptiste Lacoste, César H. Comin

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
FundersGoogle ResearchFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo
KeywordsComputer scienceSegmentationArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)MetadataGround truthContrast (vision)OutlierAnnotationSet (abstract data type)Artificial neural networkTask (project management)Convolutional neural networkGeneralizationTransfer of learningSample (material)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Creating a dataset for training supervised machine learning algorithms can be a demanding task. This is especially true for blood vessel segmentation since one or more specialists are usually required for image annotation, and creating ground truth labels for just a single image can take up to several hours. In addition, it is paramount that the annotated samples represent well the different conditions that might affect the imaged tissues as well as possible changes in the image acquisition process. This can only be achieved by considering samples that are typical in the dataset as well as atypical, or even outlier, samples. We introduce VessMAP, an annotated and highly heterogeneous blood vessel segmentation dataset acquired by carefully sampling relevant images from a large non-annotated dataset containing fluorescence microscopy images. Each image of the dataset contains metadata information regarding the contrast, amount of noise, density, and intensity variability of the vessels. Prototypical and atypical samples were carefully selected from the base dataset using the available metadata information, thus defining an assorted set of images that can be used for measuring the performance of segmentation algorithms on samples that are highly distinct from each other. We show that datasets traditionally used for developing new blood vessel segmentation algorithms tend to have low heterogeneity. Thus, neural networks trained on as few as four samples can generalize well to all other samples. In contrast, the training samples used for the VessMAP dataset can be critical to the generalization capability of a neural network. For instance, training on samples with good contrast leads to models with poor inference quality. Interestingly, while some training sets lead to Dice scores as low as 0.59, a careful selection of the training samples results in a Dice score of 0.85. Thus, the VessMAP dataset can be used for the development of new active learning methods for selecting relevant samples for manual annotation as well as for analyzing the robustness of segmentation models to distribution shifts of the data.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.177
Threshold uncertainty score0.148

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicRetinal Imaging and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207