You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Our current approach for MS lesion detection/segmentation is to (i) segment the spina cord, (ii) crop it using the segmentation mask and (iii) use the cropped output for training a model.
However, this is sub-efficient, considering that the spinal cord segmentation itself relies on spinal cord centerline detection.
Idea: Train a robust model for centerline detection, which outputs would be used in lieu of the spinal cord segmentation, for training DL models.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
We discussed the pros and cons of training a model to detect the centerline.
PROS:
We would not need to correct the segmentations errors
More efficient since the spinal cord segmentation is used to get the centerline, we could directly use the centerline for the training of our DL models
CONS:
segmentation is useful to co-register contrast together
only 5-10% (for T2w) needed manual correction
To first generate the centerline, we need the segmentation
the spinal cord segmentation can be used to validate if a lesion is detected in the cord for example
VERDICT: we willl continue with the spinal cord segmentation (corrected) to get the centerline
Our current approach for MS lesion detection/segmentation is to (i) segment the spina cord, (ii) crop it using the segmentation mask and (iii) use the cropped output for training a model.
However, this is sub-efficient, considering that the spinal cord segmentation itself relies on spinal cord centerline detection.
Idea: Train a robust model for centerline detection, which outputs would be used in lieu of the spinal cord segmentation, for training DL models.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: