MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414015553 · doi:10.11159/mvml25.139

A Comparative Study of Segmentation Models for the Identification of the Trapezium Bone in X-rays

2025· article· en· W4414015553 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Youssef FRIKEL, Victor MAIGNÉ, Thomas GRÉGORY, Mélanie Courtine

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the World Congress on Electrical Engineering and Computer Systems and Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMedical Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdentification (biology)SegmentationComputer scienceComputer visionArtificial intelligenceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent advancements in deep learning have rendered the identification of bones in X-ray images imperative for tasks such as anomaly detection and surgical procedures.However, the presence of overlapping bones, such as the trapezium, has the potential to compromise the efficacy of this identification.Segmenting the trapezium in X-ray images poses a significant challenge due to its overlap with surrounding bones, including the scaphoid and trapezoid.This study explores the use of deep learning techniques to assist surgeons in accurately localizing the trapezium bone in X-ray images of the hand.This can be helpful in surgical procedures such as trapeziometacarpal joint replacement surgery.The efficacy of a set of models (namely SAM, Mobile-SAM and U-Net) was tested by utilizing radiographic images.Furthermore, a hybrid approach integrating object detection and segmentation was developed.Initially, the object detection model YOLOv8 was trained to localize the region of the image containing the trapezium.This model demonstrated a high level of performance in identifying the trapezium.The utilization of the segmentation model, U-Net, resulted in the identification of pixels belonging to the trapezium bone, thereby achieving a Dice score of 94%.This two-step approach underscores the benefits of this algorithm by reducing the computational load while maintaining high performance.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.151

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.229 · 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
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 venueProceedings of the World Congress on Electrical Engineering and Computer Systems and ScienceSame topicMedical Imaging and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207