A robust automatic nuclei segmentation technique for quantitative histopathological image analysis.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To develop a computer-aided robust nuclei segmentation technique for quantitative histopathological image analysis. STUDY DESIGN: A robust nuclei segmentation technique for histopathological image analysis is proposed. The proposed technique uses a hybrid morphological reconstruction module to reduce the intensity variation within the nuclei regions and suppress the noise in the image. A local region adaptive threshold selection module based on local optimal threshold is used to segment the nuclei. The technique incorporates domain-specific knowledge of skin histopathological images for more accurate segmentation results. RESULTS: The technique is compared to the manually labeled nuclei locations and nuclei boundaries for the performance evaluations. On different histopathological images of skin epidermis with complex background, containing more than 3000 nuclei, the technique provides a good nuclei detection performance: 88.11% sensitivity rate, 80.02% positive prediction rate and only 5.34% under-segmentation rate compared to the manually labeled nuclei locations. Compared to the 110 manually segmented nuclei regions, the proposed technique provides a good segmentation performance (in terms of the nucleus area, perimeter, and form factor). CONCLUSION: The proposed technique is able to provide more accurate segmentation performance compared to the existing techniques and can be employed for quantitative analysis of the histopathological images.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".