检索结果-内蒙古大学图书馆

Eye tracking: empirical foundations for a minimal reporting guideline

Behavior research methods 2023年第1期55卷 364-416页

作者： Kenneth Holmqvist Saga Lee Örbom Ignace T C Hooge Diederick C Niehorster Robert G Alexander Richard Andersson Jeroen S Benjamins Pieter Blignaut Anne-Marie Brouwer Lewis L Chuang Kirsten A Dalrymple Denis Drieghe Matt J Dunn Ulrich Ettinger Susann Fiedler Tom Foulsham Jos N van der Geest Dan Witzner Hansen Samuel B Hutton Enkelejda Kasneci Alan Kingstone Paul C Knox Ellen M Kok Helena Lee Joy Yeonjoo Lee Jukka M Leppänen Stephen Macknik Päivi Majaranta Susana Martinez-Conde Antje Nuthmann Marcus Nyström Jacob L Orquin Jorge Otero-Millan Soon Young Park Stanislav Popelka Frank Proudlock Frank Renkewitz Austin Roorda Michael Schulte-Mecklenbeck Bonita Sharif Frederick Shic Mark Shovman Mervyn G Thomas Ward Venrooij Raimondas Zemblys Roy S Hessels Department of Psychology Nicolaus Copernicus University Torun Poland. kenneth.holmqvist@ur.de. Department of Computer Science and Informatics University of the Free State Bloemfontein South Africa. kenneth.holmqvist@ur.de. Department of Psychology Regensburg University Regensburg Germany. kenneth.holmqvist@ur.de. Department of Psychology Regensburg University Regensburg Germany. Experimental Psychology Helmholtz Institute Utrecht University Utrecht The Netherlands. Lund University Humanities Lab and Department of Psychology Lund University Lund Sweden. Department of Ophthalmology SUNY Downstate Health Sciences University Brooklyn NY USA. Tobii Pro AB Danderyd Sweden. Social Health and Organizational Psychology Utrecht University Utrecht The Netherlands. Department of Computer Science and Informatics University of the Free State Bloemfontein South Africa. TNO Soesterberg The Netherlands. Department of Ergonomics Leibniz Institute for Working Environments and Human Factors Dortmund Germany. Institute of Informatics LMU Munich Munich Germany. Institute of Child Development University of Minnesota Minneapolis USA. School of Psychology University of Southampton Southampton UK. School of Optometry and Vision Sciences Cardiff University Cardiff UK. Department of Psychology University of Bonn Bonn Germany. Vienna University of Economics and Business Vienna Austria. Department of Psychology University of Essex Essex UK. Department of Neuroscience Erasmus MC Rotterdam The Netherlands. Machine Learning Group Department of Computer Science IT University of Copenhagen Copenhagen Denmark. SR Research Ltd Ottawa Canada. Human-Computer Interaction University of Tübingen Tübingen Germany. University of British Columbia Columbia Canada. Department of Eye and Vision Science Institute of Life Course and Medical Sciences University of Liverpool Liverpool UK. Department of Education and Pedagogy Division Education Faculty of Social and Behavioral Sciences Ut

In this paper, we present a review of how the various aspects of any study using an eye tracker (such as the instrument, methodology, environment, participant, etc.) affect the quality of the recorded eye-tracking data and the obtained eye-movement and gaze measures. We take this review to represent the empirical foundation for reporting guidelines of any study involving an eye tracker. We compare this empirical foundation to five existing reporting guidelines and to a database of 207 published eye-tracking studies. We find that reporting guidelines vary substantially and do not match with actual reporting practices. We end by deriving a minimal, flexible reporting guideline based on empirical research (Section "An empirically based minimal reporting guideline").

关键词： Data quality Eye movements Eye tracking Replicability Reporting guidelines Reporting practices Reporting standards Reproducibility

来源：评论

学校读者我要写书评

暂无评论

Why is the Winner the Best?

Why is the Winner the Best?

引用

Conference on computer vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)

作者： M. Eisenmann A. Reinke V. Weru M. D. Tizabi F. Isensee T. J. Adler S. Ali V. Andrearczyk M. Aubreville U. Baid S. Bakas N. Balu S. Bano J. Bernal S. Bodenstedt A. Casella V. Cheplygina M. Daum M. De Bruijne A. Depeursinge R. Dorent J. Egger D. G. Ellis S. Engelhardt M. Ganz N. Ghatwary G. Girard P. Godau A. Gupta L. Hansen K. Harada M. Heinrich N. Heller A. Hering A. Huaulmé P. Jannin A. E. Kavur O. Kodym M. Kozubek J. Li H. Li J. Ma C. Martín-Isla B. Menze A. Noble V. Oreiller N. Padoy S. Pati K. Payette T. Rädsch J. Rafael-Patiño V. Singh Bawa S. Speidel C. H. Sudre K. Van Wijnen M. Wagner D. Wei A. Yamlahi M. H. Yap C. Yuan M. Zenk A. Zia D. Zimmerer D. Aydogan B. Bhattarai L. Bloch R. Brüngel J. Cho C. Choi Q. Dou I. Ezhov C. M. Friedrich C. Fuller R. R. Gaire A. Galdran Á. García Faura M. Grammatikopoulou S. Hong M. Jahanifar I. Jang A. Kadkhodamohammadi I. Kang F. Kofler S. Kondo H. Kuijf M. Li M. Luu T. Martinčič P. Morais M. A. Naser B. Oliveira D. Owen S. Pang J. Park S. Park S. Płotka E. Puybareau N. Rajpoot K. Ryu N. Saeed A. Shephard P. Shi D. Štepec R. Subedi G. Tochon H. R. Torres H. Urien J. L. Vilaça K. A. Wahid H. Wang J. Wang L. Wang X. Wang B. Wiestler M. Wodzinski F. Xia J. Xie Z. Xiong S. Yang Y. Yang Z. Zhao K. Maier-Hein P. F. Jäger A. Kopp-Schneider L. Maier-Hein Division of Intelligent Medical Systems German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) Heidelberg Germany Helmholtz Imaging German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) Heidelberg Germany Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science Heidelberg University Heidelberg Germany Division of Biostatistics German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) Heidelberg Germany Division of Medical Image Computing German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) Heidelberg Germany Faculty of Engineering and Physical Sciences School of Computing University of Leeds Leeds UK Institute of Informatics School of Management HES-SO Valais-Wallis University of Applied Sciences and Arts Western Switzerland Sierre Switzerland Department of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging Lausanne University Hospital Lausanne Switzerland Technische Hochschule Ingolstadt Ingolstadt Germany Center for Artificial Intelligence and Data Science for Integrated Diagnostics (AI2D) and Center for Biomedical Image Computing and Analytics (CBICA) University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia PA USA Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine Perelman School of Medicine University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia PA USA Department of Radiology Perelman School of Medicine University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia PA USA Department of Radiology University of Washington Seattle WA USA Department of Computer Science Wellcome/EPSRC Centre for Interventional and Surgical Sciences (WEISS) University College London London UK Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona & Computer Vision Center Barcelona Spain Division of Translational Surgical Oncology National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT/UCC) Dresden Dresden Germany Department of Advanced Robotics Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia Italy Department of Electronics Information and Bioengineering Politecnico di Milano Milan Italy IT University of Copenhagen Copenhagen Denmark Department of General Visceral and Transplantation Surgery Heidelberg University Hospital Heidelberg Germany Department of Radiology and Nuc

International benchmarking competitions have become fundamental for the comparative performance assessment of image analysis methods. However, little attention has been given to investigating what can be learnt from these competitions. Do they really generate scientific progress? What are common and successful participation strategies? What makes a solution superior to a competing method? To address this gap in the literature, we performed a multicenter study with all 80 competitions that were conducted in the scope of IEEE ISBI 2021 and MICCAI 2021. Statistical analyses performed based on comprehensive descriptions of the submitted algorithms linked to their rank as well as the underlying participation strategies revealed common characteristics of winning solutions. These typically include the use of multi-task learning (63%) and/or multi-stage pipelines (61%), and a focus on augmentation (100%), image preprocessing (97%), data curation (79%), and post-processing (66%). The “typical” lead of a winning team is a computer scientist with a doctoral degree, five years of experience in biomedical image analysis, and four years of experience in deep learning. Two core general development strategies stood out for highly-ranked teams: the reflection of the metrics in the method design and the focus on analyzing and handling failure cases. According to the organizers, 43% of the winning algorithms exceeded the state of the art but only 11% completely solved the respective domain problem. The insights of our study could help researchers (1) improve algorithm development strategies when approaching new problems, and (2) focus on open research questions revealed by this work.

关键词：

来源：评论

学校读者我要写书评

暂无评论

AIROGS: ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE FOR ROBUST GLAUCOMA SCREENING CHALLENGE

arXiv

引用

arXiv 2023年

作者： De Vente, Coen Vermeer, Koenraad A. Jaccard, Nicolas Wang, He Sun, Hongyi Khader, Firas Truhn, Daniel Aimyshev, Temirgali Zhanibekuly, Yerkebulan Le, Tien-Dung Galdran, Adrian Ballester, Miguel Ángel González Carneiro, Gustavo Devika, R.G. Hrishikesh, P.S. Puthussery, Densen Liu, Hong Yang, Zekang Kondo, Satoshi Kasai, Satoshi Wang, Edward Durvasula, Ashritha Heras, Jónathan Zapata, Miguel Ángel Araújo, Teresa Aresta, Guilherme Bogunović, Hrvoje Arikan, Mustafa Lee, Yeong Chan Cho, Hyun Bin Choi, Yoon Ho Qayyum, Abdul Razzak, Imran Van Ginneken, Bram Lemij, Hans G. Sánchez, Clara I. Group Informatics Institute Universiteit Van Amsterdam Noord-Holland Amsterdam Netherlands The Department of Biomedical Engineering and Physics Amsterdam Umc Locatie Amc Noord-Holland Amsterdam Netherlands Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine Radboudumc Gelderland Nijmegen Netherlands The Rotterdam Ophthalmic Institute Rotterdam Eye Hospital Rotterdam Netherlands Project Orbis International Inc. New York United States The Peking Union Medical College Hospital Beijing China The Xuanwu Hospital Capital Medical University Beijing100053 China The Tsinghua University Beijing China The Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology University Hospital Aachen Aachen Germany Cmc Technologies Llp Nur-Sultan Kazakhstan Kbc Belgium Universitat Pompeu Fabra Barcelona Spain The Australian Institute for Machine Learning Aiml University of Adelaide Australia Icrea Barcelona Spain The Centre for Vision Speech and Signal Processing University of Surrey United Kingdom The College of Engineering Trivandrum India Founding Minds Software India The Institute of Computing Technology Chinese Academy of Sciences China The Muroran Institute of Technology Japan The Niigata University of Health and Welfare Japan The Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry University of Western Ontario London Canada The Department of Mathematics and Computer Science University of la Rioja Spain Hospital Vall Hebron Passeig Roser 126 Sant Cugat del Vallès Barcelona08195 Spain UPRetina Barcelona Spain The Christian Doppler Laboratory for Artificial Intelligence in Retina Department of Ophthalmology and Optometry Medical University of Vienna Vienna Austria The Institute of Ophthalmology University College London London United Kingdom The Research Institute for Future Medicine Samsung Medical Center Seoul Korea Republic of Sungkyunkwan University Samsung Medical Center Seoul Korea Republic of The Department of Artificial Intelligence and Informatics Mayo Clinic Jacks

The early detection of glaucoma is essential in preventing visual impairment. Artificial intelligence (AI) can be used to analyze color fundus photographs (CFPs) in a cost-effective manner, making glaucoma screening more accessible. While AI models for glaucoma screening from CFPs have shown promising results in laboratory settings, their performance decreases significantly in realworld scenarios due to the presence of out-of-distribution and low-quality images. To address this issue, we propose the Artificial Intelligence for Robust Glaucoma Screening (AIROGS) challenge. This challenge includes a large dataset of around 113,000 images from about 60,000 patients and 500 different screening centers, and encourages the development of algorithms that are robust to ungradable and unexpected input data. We evaluated solutions from 14 teams in this paper, and found that the best teams performed similarly to a set of 20 expert ophthalmologists and optometrists. The highest-scoring team achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.99 (95% CI: 0.98-0.99) for detecting ungradable images on-the-fly. Additionally, many of the algorithms showed robust performance when tested on three other publicly available datasets. These results demonstrate the feasibility of robust AI-enabled glaucoma screening. Copyright © 2023, The Authors. All rights reserved.

关键词： Diagnosis

来源：评论

学校读者我要写书评

暂无评论

Why is the winner the best?

arXiv

引用

arXiv 2023年

作者： Eisenmann, M. Reinke, A. Weru, V. Tizabi, M.D. Isensee, F. Adler, T.J. Ali, S. Andrearczyk, V. Aubreville, M. Baid, U. Bakas, S. Balu, N. Bano, S. Bernal, J. Bodenstedt, S. Casella, A. Cheplygina, V. Daum, M. de Bruijne, M. Depeursinge, A. Dorent, R. Egger, J. Ellis, D.G. Engelhardt, S. Ganz, M. Ghatwary, N. Girard, G. Godau, P. Gupta, A. Hansen, L. Harada, K. Heinrich, M. Heller, N. Hering, A. Huaulmé, A. Jannin, P. Kavur, A.E. Kodym, O. Kozubek, M. Li, J. Li, H. Ma, J. Martín-Isla, C. Menze, B. Noble, A. Oreiller, V. Padoy, N. Pati, S. Payette, K. Rädsch, T. Rafael-Patiño, J. Bawa, V. Singh Speidel, S. Sudre, C.H. van Wijnen, K. Wagner, M. Wei, D. Yamlahi, A. Yap, M.H. Yuan, C. Zenk, M. Zia, A. Zimmerer, D. Aydogan, D. Bhattarai, B. Bloch, L. Brüngel, R. Cho, J. Choi, C. Dou, Q. Ezhov, I. Friedrich, C.M. Fuller, C. Gaire, R.R. Galdran, A. Faura, Á. García Grammatikopoulou, M. Hong, S. Jahanifar, M. Jang, I. Kadkhodamohammadi, A. Kang, I. Kofler, F. Kondo, S. Kuijf, H. Li, M. Luu, M. Martinčič, T. Morais, P. Naser, M.A. Oliveira, B. Owen, D. Pang, S. Park, J. Park, S. Plotka, S. Puybareau, E. Rajpoot, N. Ryu, K. Saeed, N. Shephard, A. Shi, P. Štepec, D. Subedi, R. Tochon, G. Torres, H.R. Urien, H. Vilaça, J.L. Wahid, K.A. Wang, H. Wang, J. Wang, L. Wang, X. Wiestler, B. Wodzinski, M. Xia, F. Xie, J. Xiong, Z. Yang, S. Yang, Y. Zhao, Z. Maier-Hein, K. Jäger, P.F. Kopp-Schneider, A. Maier-Hein, L. Heidelberg Germany Heidelberg Germany Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science Heidelberg University Heidelberg Germany Heidelberg Germany Heidelberg Germany School of Computing Faculty of Engineering and Physical Sciences University of Leeds Leeds United Kingdom Institute of Informatics School of Management HES-SO Valais-Wallis University of Applied Sciences and Arts Western Switzerland Sierre Switzerland Department of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging Lausanne University Hospital Lausanne Switzerland Technische Hochschule Ingolstadt Ingolstadt Germany University of Pennsylvania PhiladelphiaPA United States Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine Perelman School of Medicine University of Pennsylvania PhiladelphiaPA United States Department of Radiology Perelman School of Medicine University of Pennsylvania PhiladelphiaPA United States Department of Radiology University of Washington SeattleWA United States Department of Computer Science University College London London United Kingdom Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona & Computer Vision Center Barcelona Spain Dresden Dresden Germany Department of Advanced Robotics Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia Italy IT University of Copenhagen Copenhagen Denmark Department of General Visceral and Transplantation Surgery Heidelberg University Hospital Heidelberg Germany Biomedical Imaging Group Rotterdam Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine Erasmus MC Rotterdam Netherlands Department of Computer Science University of Copenhagen Copenhagen Denmark Sierre Switzerland Harvard Medical School Brigham and Women’s Hospital BostonMA United States School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences King’s College London London United Kingdom Essen Germany University of Nebraska Medical Center OmahaNE United States Department of Internal Medicine III Heidelberg University Hospital Heidelberg Germany Neurobiology Research Unit Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet C

International benchmarking competitions have become fundamental for the comparative performance assessment of image analysis methods. However, little attention has been given to investigating what can be learnt from these competitions. Do they really generate scientific progress? What are common and successful participation strategies? What makes a solution superior to a competing method? To address this gap in the literature, we performed a multicenter study with all 80 competitions that were conducted in the scope of IEEE ISBI 2021 and MICCAI 2021. Statistical analyses performed based on comprehensive descriptions of the submitted algorithms linked to their rank as well as the underlying participation strategies revealed common characteristics of winning solutions. These typically include the use of multi-task learning (63%) and/or multi-stage pipelines (61%), and a focus on augmentation (100%), image preprocessing (97%), data curation (79%), and postprocessing (66%). The "typical" lead of a winning team is a computer scientist with a doctoral degree, five years of experience in biomedical image analysis, and four years of experience in deep learning. Two core general development strategies stood out for highly-ranked teams: the reflection of the metrics in the method design and the focus on analyzing and handling failure cases. According to the organizers, 43% of the winning algorithms exceeded the state of the art but only 11% completely solved the respective domain problem. The insights of our study could help researchers (1) improve algorithm development strategies when approaching new problems, and (2) focus on open research questions revealed by this work. © 2023, CC BY.

关键词： Benchmarking

来源：评论

学校读者我要写书评

暂无评论

The Liver Tumor Segmentation Benchmark (LiTS)

arXiv

引用

arXiv 2019年

作者： Bilic, Patrick Christ, Patrick Li, Hongwei Bran Vorontsov, Eugene Ben-Cohen, Avi Kaissis, Georgios Szeskin, Adi Jacobs, Colin Mamani, Gabriel Efrain Humpire Chartrand, Gabriel Lohöfer, Fabian Holch, Julian Walter Sommer, Wieland Hofmann, Felix Hostettler, Alexandre Lev-Cohain, Naama Drozdzal, Michal Amitai, Michal Marianne Vivanti, Refael Sosna, Jacob Ezhov, Ivan Sekuboyina, Anjany Navarro, Fernando Kofler, Florian Paetzold, Johannes C. Shit, Suprosanna Hu, Xiaobin Lipková, Jana Rempfler, Markus Piraud, Marie Kirschke, Jan Wiestler, Benedikt Zhang, Zhiheng Hülsemeyer, Christian Beetz, Marcel Ettlinger, Florian Antonelli, Michela Bae, Woong Bellver, Míriam Bi, Lei Chen, Hao Chlebus, Grzegorz Dam, Erik B. Dou, Qi Fu, Chi-Wing Georgescu, Bogdan Giró-I-Nieto, Xavier Gruen, Felix Han, Xu Heng, Pheng-Ann Hesser, Jürgen Moltz, Jan Hendrik Igel, Christian Isensee, Fabian Jäger, Paul Jia, Fucang Kaluva, Krishna Chaitanya Khened, Mahendra Kim, Ildoo Kim, Jae-Hun Kim, Sungwoong Kohl, Simon Konopczynski, Tomasz Kori, Avinash Krishnamurthi, Ganapathy Li, Fan Li, Hongchao Li, Junbo Li, Xiaomeng Lowengrub, John Ma, Jun Maier-Hein, Klaus Maninis, Kevis-Kokitsi Meine, Hans Merhof, Dorit Pai, Akshay Perslev, Mathias Petersen, Jens Pont-Tuset, Jordi Qi, Jin Qi, Xiaojuan Rippel, Oliver Roth, Karsten Sarasua, Ignacio Schenk, Andrea Shen, Zengming Torres, Jordi Wachinger, Christian Wang, Chunliang Weninger, Leon Wu, Jianrong Xu, Daguang Yang, Xiaoping Yu, Simon Chun-Ho Yuan, Yading Yue, Miao Zhang, Liping Cardoso, Jorge Bakas, Spyridon Braren, Rickmer Heinemann, Volker Pal, Christopher Tang, An Kadoury, Samuel Soler, Luc van Ginneken, Bram Greenspan, Hayit Joskowicz, Leo Menze, Bjoern Department of Informatics Technical University of Munich Germany Department of Quantitative Biomedicine University of Zurich Switzerland Ecole Polytechnique de Montréal Canada Department of Medical Imaging Radboud University Medical Center Nijmegen Netherlands Department of Biomedical Engineering Tel-Aviv University Israel Germany Pattern Analysis and Learning Group Department of Radiation Oncology Heidelberg University Hospital Heidelberg Germany Philips Research China Philips China Innovation Campus Shanghai China School of Biomedical Engineering & Imaging Sciences King0s College London London United Kingdom Institute for AI in Medicine Technical University of Munich Germany Department of Computer Science Guangdong University of Foreign Studies China Institute for diagnostic and interventional radiology Klinikum rechts der Isar Technical University of Munich Germany Institute for Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology Klinikum Rechts der Isar Technical University of Munich Germany Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery The Affiliated Drum Tower Hospital Nanjing University Medical School China Department of Computing Imperial College London London United Kingdom Institute for Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine Helmholtz Zentrum München Neuherberg Germany Brigham and Women's Hospital Harvard Medical School United States School of Computer Science and Engineering The Hebrew University of Jerusalem Israel University of Pennsylvania PA United States Pte. Ltd. Singapore Medical Imaging and Reconstruction Lab Department of Engineering Design Indian Institute of Technology Madras India Sensetime Shanghai China Department of Radiology Perelman School of Medicine University of Pennsylvania United States Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine Perelman School of Medicine University of Pennsylvania PA United States Co. Ltd China MontréalQC Canada Department of Radiology Radiation Oncology and Nuclear Medicine University of Montréal

In this work, we report the set-up and results of the Liver Tumor Segmentation Benchmark (LiTS), which was organized in conjunction with the IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI) 2017 and the International Conferences on Medical Image Computing and computer-Assisted Intervention (MICCAI) 2017 and 2018. The image dataset is diverse and contains primary and secondary tumors with varied sizes and appearances with various lesion-to-background levels (hyper-/hypo-dense), created in collaboration with seven hospitals and research institutions. Seventy-five submitted liver and liver tumor segmentation algorithms were trained on a set of 131 computed tomography (CT) volumes and were tested on 70 unseen test images acquired from different patients. We found that not a single algorithm performed best for both liver and liver tumors in the three events. The best liver segmentation algorithm achieved a Dice score of 0.963, whereas, for tumor segmentation, the best algorithms achieved Dices scores of 0.674 (ISBI 2017), 0.702 (MICCAI 2017), and 0.739 (MICCAI 2018). Retrospectively, we performed additional analysis on liver tumor detection and revealed that not all top-performing segmentation algorithms worked well for tumor detection. The best liver tumor detection method achieved a lesion-wise recall of 0.458 (ISBI 2017), 0.515 (MICCAI 2017), and 0.554 (MICCAI 2018), indicating the need for further research. LiTS remains an active benchmark and resource for research, e.g., contributing the liver-related segmentation tasks in http://***/. In addition, both data and online evaluation are accessible via ***. © 2019, CC BY-NC-ND.

关键词： Deep learning

来源：评论

学校读者我要写书评

暂无评论

Biomedical image analysis competitions: The state of current participation practice

arXiv

引用

arXiv 2022年

作者： Eisenmann, Matthias Reinke, Annika Weru, Vivienn Tizabi, Minu Dietlinde Isensee, Fabian Adler, Tim J. Godau, Patrick Cheplygina, Veronika Kozubek, Michal Maier-Hein, Klaus Jäger, Paul F. Kopp-Schneider, Annette Maier-Hein, Lena Ali, Sharib Gupta, Anubha Kybic, Jan Noble, Alison de Solórzano, Carlos Ortiz Pachade, Samiksha Petitjean, Caroline Sage, Daniel Wei, Donglai Wilden, Elizabeth Alapatt, Deepak Andrearczyk, Vincent Baid, Ujjwal Bakas, Spyridon Balu, Niranjan Bano, Sophia Bawa, Vivek Singh Bernal, Jorge Bodenstedt, Sebastian Casella, Alessandro Choi, Jinwook Commowick, Olivier Daum, Marie Depeursinge, Adrien Dorent, Reuben Egger, Jan Eichhorn, Hannah Engelhardt, Sandy Ganz, Melanie Girard, Gabriel Hansen, Lasse Heinrich, Mattias Heller, Nicholas Hering, Alessa Huaulmé, Arnaud Kim, Hyunjeong Li, Hongwei Bran Landman, Bennett Li, Jianning Ma, Jun Martel, Anne Martín-Isla, Carlos Menze, Bjoern Nwoye, Chinedu Innocent Oreiller, Valentin Padoy, Nicolas Pati, Sarthak Payette, Kelly Sudre, Carole van Wijnen, Kimberlin Vardazaryan, Armine Vercauteren, Tom Wagner, Martin Wang, Chuanbo Yap, Moi Hoon Yu, Zeyun Yuan, Chun Zenk, Maximilian Zia, Aneeq Zimmerer, David Bao, Rina Choi, Chanyeol Cohen, Andrew Dzyubachyk, Oleh Galdran, Adrian Gan, Tianyuan Guo, Tianqi Gupta, Pradyumna Haithami, Mahmood Ho, Edward Jang, Ikbeom Li, Zhili Luo, Zhengbo Lux, Filip Makrogiannis, Sokratis Müller, Dominik Oh, Young-Tack Pang, Subeen Pape, Constantin Polat, Gorkem Reed, Charlotte Rosalie Ryu, Kanghyun Scherr, Tim Thambawita, Vajira Wang, Haoyu Wang, Xinliang Xu, Kele Yeh, Hung Yeo, Doyeob Yuan, Yixuan Zeng, Yan Zhao, Xin Abbing, Julian Adam, Jannes Adluru, Nagesh Agethen, Niklas Ahmed, Salman Al Khalil, Yasmina Alenyà, Mireia Alhoniemi, Esa An, Chengyang Arega, Tewodros Weldebirhan Avisdris, Netanell Aydogan, Dogu Baran Bai, Yingbin Calisto, Maria Baldeon Basaran, Berke Doga Beetz, Marcel Bian, Hao Blansit, Kevin Bloch, Louise Bohnsack, Robert Bosticardo, Sara Breen, Jack Brudfors, Mikael Brüngel, Raphael Cabezas, Mariano Cacciola, Alb Heidelberg Division of Intelligent Medical Systems Germany Heidelberg HI Helmholtz Imaging Germany Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science Heidelberg University Heidelberg Germany Heidelberg Division of Biostatistics Germany Heidelberg Division of Medical Image Computing Germany Heidelberg HI Applied Vision Lab Germany IT University of Copenhagen Copenhagen Denmark Centre for Biomedical Image Analysis Masaryk University Brno Czech Republic Heidelberg Interactive Machine Learning Group Germany Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science and Medical Faculty Heidelberg University Heidelberg Germany NCT Heidelberg DKFZ University Hospital Heidelberg Germany School of Computing University of Leeds Leeds United Kingdom SBILab Department of ECE IIIT-Delhi India Faculty of Electrical Engineering Czech Technical University Prague Czech Republic Institute of Biomedical Engineering University of Oxford United Kingdom Center for Applied Medical Research Pamplona Spain Shri Guru Gobind Singhji Institute of Engineering and Technology Maharashtra Nanded India Université de Rouen Normandie France Lausanne Switzerland School of Engineering and Applied Science Harvard University United States ICube University of Strasbourg CNRS France Institute of Informatics School of Management HES-SO Valais-Wallis University of Applied Sciences and Arts Western Switzerland Techno-Pôle 3 Sierre3960 Switzerland Department of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging Lausanne University Hospital Rue du Bugnon 46 LausanneCH-1011 Switzerland University of Pennsylvania PhiladelphiaPA United States Department of Radiology University of Washington United States Wellcome EPSRC Centre for Interventional and Surgical Sciences University College London London United Kingdom Visual Artificial Intelligence Lab Oxford Brookes University Oxford United Kingdom Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona & Computer Vision Center Spain Dresden Fetscherstraße 74 PF 64 Dresden01307 Germany

The number of international benchmarking competitions is steadily increasing in various fields of machine learning (ML) research and practice. So far, however, little is known about the common practice as well as bottlenecks faced by the community in tackling the research questions posed. To shed light on the status quo of algorithm development in the specific field of biomedical imaging analysis, we designed an international survey that was issued to all participants of challenges conducted in conjunction with the IEEE ISBI 2021 and MICCAI 2021 conferences (80 competitions in total). The survey covered participants' expertise and working environments, their chosen strategies, as well as algorithm characteristics. A median of 72% challenge participants took part in the survey. According to our results, knowledge exchange was the primary incentive (70%) for participation, while the reception of prize money played only a minor role (16%). While a median of 80 working hours was spent on method development, a large portion of participants stated that they did not have enough time for method development (32%). 25% perceived the infrastructure to be a bottleneck. Overall, 94% of all solutions were deep learning-based. Of these, 84% were based on standard architectures. 43% of the respondents reported that the data samples (e.g., images) were too large to be processed at once. This was most commonly addressed by patch-based training (69%), downsampling (37%), and solving 3D analysis tasks as a series of 2D tasks. K-fold cross-validation on the training set was performed by only 37% of the participants and only 50% of the participants performed ensembling based on multiple identical models (61%) or heterogeneous models (39%). 48% of the respondents applied postprocessing steps. © 2022, CC BY.

关键词： Benchmarking

来源：评论

学校读者我要写书评

暂无评论

25th Annual Computational Neuroscience Meeting CNS-2016, Seogwipo City, South Korea, July 2-7, 2016 Abstracts

引用

BMC NEUROSCIENCE 2016年第1期17卷 1-112页

作者： [Anonymous] Computational Neurobiology Laboratory The Salk Institute for Biological Studies San Diego USA UNIC CNRS Gif sur Yvette France The European Institute for Theoretical Neuroscience (EITN) Paris France ATR Computational Neuroscience Laboratories Kyoto Japan Krembil Research Institute University Health Network Toronto Canada Department of Physiology University of Toronto Toronto Canada Department of Medicine (Neurology) University of Toronto Toronto Canada Department of Physics University of New Hampshire Durham USA Department of Neurophysiology Nencki Institute of Experimental Biology Warsaw Poland Department of Theory Wigner Research Centre for Physics of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences Budapest Hungary Department of Mathematical Sciences KAIST Daejoen Republic of Korea Department of Mathematics University of Houston Houston USA Department of Biochemistry & Cell Biology and Institute of Biosciences and Bioengineering Rice University Houston USA Department of Biology and Biochemistry University of Houston Houston USA Grupo de Neurocomputación Biológica Dpto. de Ingeniería Informática Escuela Politécnica Superior Universidad Autónoma de Madrid Madrid Spain Department of Biological Sciences University of Southern California Los Angeles USA Center for Neuroscience Korea Institute of Science and Technology Seoul South Korea Department of Neurology Albert Einstein College of Medicine Bronx USA Center for Neuroscience KIST Seoul South Korea Department of Neuroscience University of Science and Technology Daejon South Korea Systems Neuroscience Group QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute Herston Australia Department of Psychology Yonsei University Seoul South Korea Department of Psychiatry Kyung Hee University Hospital at Gangdong Seoul South Korea Department of Psychiatry Veterans Administration Boston Healthcare System and Harvard Medical School Brockton USA Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering The University of Melbourne Parkvil

A1 Functional advantages of cell-type heterogeneity in neural circuits Tatyana O. Sharpee A2 Mesoscopic modeling of propagating waves in visual cortex Alain Destexhe A3 Dynamics and biomarkers of mental disorders Mitsuo Kawato F1 Precise recruitment of spiking output at theta frequencies requires dendritic h-channels in multi-compartment models of oriens-lacunosum/moleculare hippocampal interneurons Vladislav Sekulić, Frances K. Skinner F2 Kernel methods in reconstruction of current sources from extracellular potentials for single cells and the whole brains Daniel K. Wójcik, Chaitanya Chintaluri, Dorottya Cserpán, Zoltán Somogyvári F3 The synchronized periods depend on intracellular transcriptional repression mechanisms in circadian clocks. Jae Kyoung Kim, Zachary P. Kilpatrick, Matthew R. Bennett, Kresimir Josić O1 Assessing irregularity and coordination of spiking-bursting rhythms in central pattern generators Irene Elices, David Arroyo, Rafael Levi, Francisco B. Rodriguez, Pablo Varona O2 Regulation of top-down processing by cortically-projecting parvalbumin positive neurons in basal forebrain Eunjin Hwang, Bowon Kim, Hio-Been Han, Tae Kim, James T. McKenna, Ritchie E. Brown, Robert W. McCarley, Jee Hyun Choi O3 Modeling auditory stream segregation, build-up and bistability James Rankin, Pamela Osborn Popp, John Rinzel O4 Strong competition between tonotopic neural ensembles explains pitch-related dynamics of auditory cortex evoked fields Alejandro Tabas, André Rupp, Emili Balaguer-Ballester O5 A simple model of retinal response to multi-electrode stimulation Matias I. Maturana, David B. Grayden, Shaun L. Cloherty, Tatiana Kameneva, Michael R. Ibbotson, Hamish Meffin O6 Noise correlations in V4 area correlate with behavioral performance in visual discrimination task Veronika Koren, Timm Lochmann, Valentin Dragoi, Klaus Obermayer O7 Input-location dependent gain modulation in cerebellar nucleus neurons Maria Psarrou, Maria Schilstra, Neil Davey, Benjamin Torben-Ni

关键词：

来源：评论

学校读者我要写书评

暂无评论

Understanding metric-related pitfalls in image analysis validation

arXiv

引用

arXiv 2023年

作者： Reinke, Annika Tizabi, Minu D. Baumgartner, Michael Eisenmann, Matthias Heckmann-Nötzel, Doreen Kavur, A. Emre Rädsch, Tim Sudre, Carole H. Acion, Laura Antonelli, Michela Arbel, Tal Bakas, Spyridon Benis, Arriel Blaschko, Matthew B. Buettner, Florian Cardoso, M. Jorge Cheplygina, Veronika Chen, Jianxu Christodoulou, Evangelia Cimini, Beth A. Collins, Gary S. Farahani, Keyvan Ferrer, Luciana Galdran, Adrian van Ginneken, Bram Glocker, Ben Godau, Patrick Haase, Robert Hashimoto, Daniel A. Hoffman, Michael M. Huisman, Merel Isensee, Fabian Jannin, Pierre Kahn, Charles E. Kainmueller, Dagmar Kainz, Bernhard Karargyris, Alexandros Karthikesalingam, Alan Kenngott, Hannes Kleesiek, Jens Kofler, Florian Kooi, Thijs Kopp-Schneider, Annette Kozubek, Michal Kreshuk, Anna Kurc, Tahsin Landman, Bennett A. Litjens, Geert Madani, Amin Maier-Hein, Klaus Martel, Anne L. Mattson, Peter Meijering, Erik Menze, Bjoern Moons, Karel G.M. Müller, Henning Nichyporuk, Brennan Nickel, Felix Petersen, Jens Rafelski, Susanne M. Rajpoot, Nasir Reyes, Mauricio Riegler, Michael A. Rieke, Nicola Saez-Rodriguez, Julio Sánchez, Clara I. Shetty, Shravya Summers, Ronald M. Taha, Abdel A. Tiulpin, Aleksei Tsaftaris, Sotirios A. van Calster, Ben Varoquaux, Gaël Yaniv, Ziv R. Jäger, Paul F. Maier-Hein, Lena Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science Heidelberg University Heidelberg Germany Heidelberg Division of Intelligent Medical Systems Germany NCT Heidelberg A Partnership Between DKFZ University Medical Center Heidelberg Germany Heidelberg Division of Medical Image Computing Germany Heidelberg Division of Intelligent Medical Systems Germany MRC Unit for Lifelong Health and Ageing UCL Centre for Medical Image Computing Department of Computer Science University College London London United Kingdom School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Science King’s College London London United Kingdom Instituto de Cálculo CONICET – Universidad de Buenos Aires Buenos Aires Argentina Centre for Medical Image Computing University College London London United Kingdom McGill University Montreal Canada Division of Computational Pathology Dept of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine Indiana University School of Medicine IU Health Information and Translational Sciences Building Indianapolis United States University of Pennsylvania Richards Medical Research Laboratories FL7 PhiladelphiaPA United States Department of Digital Medical Technologies Holon Institute of Technology Holon Israel European Federation for Medical Informatics Le Mont-sur-Lausanne Switzerland Center for Processing Speech and Images Department of Electrical Engineering KU Leuven Leuven Belgium partner site Frankfurt/Mainz a partnership between DKFZ and UCT Frankfurt Marburg Germany Heidelberg Germany Goethe University Frankfurt Department of Medicine Germany Goethe University Frankfurt Department of Informatics Germany and Frankfurt Cancer Insititute Germany Department of Computer Science IT University of Copenhagen Copenhagen Denmark Leibniz-Institut für Analytische Wissenschaften – ISAS – e.V. Dortmund Germany Imaging Platform Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard CambridgeMA United States Centre for Statistics in Medicine University of Oxford Oxford United Kingdom Center for Biomedical In

Validation metrics are key for tracking scientific progress and bridging the current chasm between artificial intelligence (AI) research and its translation into practice. However, increasing evidence shows that particularly in image analysis, metrics are often chosen inadequately. While taking into account the individual strengths, weaknesses, and limitations of validation metrics is a critical prerequisite to making educated choices, the relevant knowledge is currently scattered and poorly accessible to individual researchers. Based on a multi-stage Delphi process conducted by a multidisciplinary expert consortium as well as extensive community feedback, the present work provides the first reliable and comprehensive common point of access to information on pitfalls related to validation metrics in image analysis. While focused on biomedical image analysis, the addressed pitfalls generalize across application domains and are categorized according to a newly created, domain-agnostic taxonomy. The work serves to enhance global comprehension of a key topic in image analysis validation. © 2023, CC BY.

关键词： computer vision

来源：评论

学校读者我要写书评

暂无评论

26th Annual Computational Neuroscience Meeting (CNS*2017): Part 3 Antwerp, Belgium. 15-20 July 2017 Abstracts

引用

BMC NEUROSCIENCE 2017年第SUPPL 1期18卷 95-176页

作者： [Anonymous] Department of Neuroscience Yale University New Haven CT 06520 USA Department Physiology & Pharmacology SUNY Downstate Brooklyn NY 11203 USA NYU School of Engineering 6 MetroTech Center Brooklyn NY 11201 USA Departament de Matemàtica Aplicada Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya Barcelona 08028 Spain Institut de Neurobiologie de la Méditerrannée (INMED) INSERM UMR901 Aix-Marseille Univ Marseille France Center of Neural Science New York University New York NY USA Aix-Marseille Univ INSERM INS Inst Neurosci Syst Marseille France Laboratoire de Physique Théorique et Modélisation CNRS UMR 8089 Université de Cergy-Pontoise 95300 Cergy-Pontoise Cedex France Department of Mathematics and Computer Science ENSAT Abdelmalek Essaadi’s University Tangier Morocco Laboratory of Natural Computation Department of Information and Electrical Engineering and Applied Mathematics University of Salerno 84084 Fisciano SA Italy Department of Medicine University of Salerno 84083 Lancusi SA Italy Dipartimento di Fisica Università degli Studi Aldo Moro Bari and INFN Sezione Di Bari Italy Data Analysis Department Ghent University Ghent Belgium Coma Science Group University of Liège Liège Belgium Cruces Hospital and Ikerbasque Research Center Bilbao Spain BIOtech Department of Industrial Engineering University of Trento and IRCS-PAT FBK 38010 Trento Italy Department of Data Analysis Ghent University Ghent 9000 Belgium The Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging University College London London WC1N 3BG UK Department of Electronic Engineering NED University of Engineering and Technology Karachi Pakistan Blue Brain Project École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne Lausanne Switzerland Departement of Mathematics Swansea University Swansea Wales UK Laboratory for Topology and Neuroscience at the Brain Mind Institute École polytechnique fédérale de Lausanne Lausanne Switzerland Institute of Mathematics University of Aberdeen Aberdeen Scotland UK Department of Integrativ

来源：评论

学校读者我要写书评

暂无评论

Author Correction: Federated learning enables big data for rare cancer boundary detection

引用

Nature communications 2023年第1期14卷 436页

作者： Sarthak Pati Ujjwal Baid Brandon Edwards Micah Sheller Shih-Han Wang G Anthony Reina Patrick Foley Alexey Gruzdev Deepthi Karkada Christos Davatzikos Chiharu Sako Satyam Ghodasara Michel Bilello Suyash Mohan Philipp Vollmuth Gianluca Brugnara Chandrakanth J Preetha Felix Sahm Klaus Maier-Hein Maximilian Zenk Martin Bendszus Wolfgang Wick Evan Calabrese Jeffrey Rudie Javier Villanueva-Meyer Soonmee Cha Madhura Ingalhalikar Manali Jadhav Umang Pandey Jitender Saini John Garrett Matthew Larson Robert Jeraj Stuart Currie Russell Frood Kavi Fatania Raymond Y Huang Ken Chang Carmen Balaña Jaume Capellades Josep Puig Johannes Trenkler Josef Pichler Georg Necker Andreas Haunschmidt Stephan Meckel Gaurav Shukla Spencer Liem Gregory S Alexander Joseph Lombardo Joshua D Palmer Adam E Flanders Adam P Dicker Haris I Sair Craig K Jones Archana Venkataraman Meirui Jiang Tiffany Y So Cheng Chen Pheng Ann Heng Qi Dou Michal Kozubek Filip Lux Jan Michálek Petr Matula Miloš Keřkovský Tereza Kopřivová Marek Dostál Václav Vybíhal Michael A Vogelbaum J Ross Mitchell Joaquim Farinhas Joseph A Maldjian Chandan Ganesh Bangalore Yogananda Marco C Pinho Divya Reddy James Holcomb Benjamin C Wagner Benjamin M Ellingson Timothy F Cloughesy Catalina Raymond Talia Oughourlian Akifumi Hagiwara Chencai Wang Minh-Son To Sargam Bhardwaj Chee Chong Marc Agzarian Alexandre Xavier Falcão Samuel B Martins Bernardo C A Teixeira Flávia Sprenger David Menotti Diego R Lucio Pamela LaMontagne Daniel Marcus Benedikt Wiestler Florian Kofler Ivan Ezhov Marie Metz Rajan Jain Matthew Lee Yvonne W Lui Richard McKinley Johannes Slotboom Piotr Radojewski Raphael Meier Roland Wiest Derrick Murcia Eric Fu Rourke Haas John Thompson David Ryan Ormond Chaitra Badve Andrew E Sloan Vachan Vadmal Kristin Waite Rivka R Colen Linmin Pei Murat Ak Ashok Srinivasan J Rajiv Bapuraj Arvind Rao Nicholas Wang Ota Yoshiaki Toshio Moritani Sevcan Turk Joonsang Lee Snehal Prabhudesai Fanny Morón Jacob Mandel Konstantinos Kamnitsas Ben Glocker Luke V M Dixon Matthew Williams Peter Zamp Center for Biomedical Image Computing and Analytics (CBICA) University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia PA USA. Department of Radiology Perelman School of Medicine University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia PA USA. Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine Perelman School of Medicine University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia PA USA. Department of Informatics Technical University of Munich Munich Bavaria Germany. Intel Corporation Santa Clara CA USA. Department of Neuroradiology Heidelberg University Hospital Heidelberg Germany. Clinical Cooperation Unit Neuropathology German Cancer Consortium (DKTK) within the German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) Heidelberg Germany. Department of Neuropathology Heidelberg University Hospital Heidelberg Germany. Division of Medical Image Computing German Cancer Research Center Heidelberg Germany. Pattern Analysis and Learning Group Department of Radiation Oncology Heidelberg University Hospital Heidelberg Germany. Neurology Clinic Heidelberg University Hospital Heidelberg Germany. Department of Radiology & Biomedical Imaging University of California San Francisco San Francisco CA USA. Symbiosis Center for Medical Image Analysis Symbiosis International University Pune Maharashtra India. Department of Neuroimaging and Interventional Radiology National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences Bangalore Karnataka India. Department of Radiology School of Medicine and Public Health University of Wisconsin Madison WI USA. Department of Medical Physics School of Medicine and Public Health University of Wisconsin Madison WI USA. Leeds Teaching Hospitals Trust Department of Radiology Leeds UK. Department of Radiology Brigham and Women's Hospital Harvard Medical School Boston MA USA. Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging Massachusetts General Hospital Charlestown MA USA. Catalan Institute of Oncology Badalona Spain. Consorci MAR Parc de Salut de Barcelona Catalonia Spain. Department of Radiology (IDI

来源：评论

学校读者我要写书评

暂无评论

建议与咨询留下您的常用邮箱和电话号码，以便我们向您反馈解决方案和替代方法

时间限定

文献类型

馆藏选择

核心期刊

语言

文献类型

帮助

文字说明：

检索规则说明：

检索范例：

分类表

所选分类

限定检索结果

文献类型

馆藏范围

日期分布

学科分类号

主题

机构

作者

语言

请选择保存的检索档案：

请选择收藏分类：

通借通还

建议与咨询 留下您的常用邮箱和电话号码，以便我们向您反馈解决方案和替代方法

时间限定

文献类型

馆藏选择

核心期刊

语言

文献类型

帮助

文字说明：

检索规则说明：

检索范例：

分类表

所选分类

限定检索结果

文献类型

馆藏范围

日期分布

学科分类号

主题

机构

作者

语言

请选择保存的检索档案： 新增检索档案 确定 取消

请选择收藏分类： 新增自定义分类 确定 取消

通借通还

建议与咨询留下您的常用邮箱和电话号码，以便我们向您反馈解决方案和替代方法

请选择保存的检索档案：

请选择收藏分类：