-
Deep learning for size-agnostic inverse design of random-network 3D printed mechanical metamaterials
Authors:
Helda Pahlavani,
Kostas Tsifoutis-Kazolis,
Prerak Mody,
Jie Zhou,
Mohammad J. Mirzaali,
Amir A. Zadpoor
Abstract:
Practical applications of mechanical metamaterials often involve solving inverse problems where the objective is to find the (multiple) microarchitectures that give rise to a given set of properties. The limited resolution of additive manufacturing techniques often requires solving such inverse problems for specific sizes. One should, therefore, find multiple microarchitectural designs that exhibi…
▽ More
Practical applications of mechanical metamaterials often involve solving inverse problems where the objective is to find the (multiple) microarchitectures that give rise to a given set of properties. The limited resolution of additive manufacturing techniques often requires solving such inverse problems for specific sizes. One should, therefore, find multiple microarchitectural designs that exhibit the desired properties for a specimen with given dimensions. Moreover, the candidate microarchitectures should be resistant to fatigue and fracture, meaning that peak stresses should be minimized as well. Such a multi-objective inverse design problem is formidably difficult to solve but its solution is the key to real-world applications of mechanical metamaterials. Here, we propose a modular approach titled 'Deep-DRAM' that combines four decoupled models, including two deep learning models (DLM), a deep generative model (DGM) based on conditional variational autoencoders (CVAE), and direct finite element (FE) simulations. Deep-DRAM (deep learning for the design of random-network metamaterials) integrates these models into a unified framework capable of finding many solutions to the multi-objective inverse design problem posed here. The integrated framework first introduces the desired elastic properties to the DGM, which returns a set of candidate designs. The candidate designs, together with the target specimen dimensions are then passed to the DLM which predicts their actual elastic properties considering the specimen size. After a filtering step based on the closeness of the actual properties to the desired ones, the last step uses direct FE simulations to identify the designs with the minimum peak stresses.
△ Less
Submitted 22 December, 2022;
originally announced December 2022.
-
Report on AI-Infused Contouring Workflows for Adaptive Proton Therapy in the Head and Neck
Authors:
Nicolas F. Chaves-de-Plaza,
Prerak Mody,
Klaus Hildebrandt,
Marius Staring,
Eleftheria Astreinidou,
Mischa de Ridder,
Huib de Ridder,
Rene van Egmond
Abstract:
Delineation of tumors and organs-at-risk permits detecting and correcting changes in the patients' anatomy throughout the treatment, making it a core step of adaptive proton therapy (APT). Although AI-based auto-contouring technologies have sped up this process, the time needed to perform the quality assessment (QA) of the generated contours remains a bottleneck, taking clinicians between several…
▽ More
Delineation of tumors and organs-at-risk permits detecting and correcting changes in the patients' anatomy throughout the treatment, making it a core step of adaptive proton therapy (APT). Although AI-based auto-contouring technologies have sped up this process, the time needed to perform the quality assessment (QA) of the generated contours remains a bottleneck, taking clinicians between several minutes up to an hour to complete. This paper introduces a fast contouring workflow suitable for time-critical APT, enabling detection of anatomical changes in shorter time frames and with a lower demand of clinical resources. The proposed AI-infused workflow follows two principles uncovered after reviewing the APT literature and conducting several interviews and an observational study in two radiotherapy centers in the Netherlands. First, enable targeted inspection of the generated contours by leveraging AI uncertainty and clinically-relevant features such as the proximity of the organs-at-risk to the tumor. Second, minimize the number of interactions needed to edit faulty delineations with redundancy-aware editing tools that provide the user a sense of predictability and control. We use a proof of concept that we validated with clinicians to demonstrate how current and upcoming AI capabilities support the workflow and how it would fit into clinical practice.
△ Less
Submitted 5 September, 2022; v1 submitted 9 August, 2022;
originally announced August 2022.
-
Comparing Bayesian Models for Organ Contouring in Head and Neck Radiotherapy
Authors:
Prerak Mody,
Nicolas Chaves-de-Plaza,
Klaus Hildebrandt,
Rene van Egmond,
Huib de Ridder,
Marius Staring
Abstract:
Deep learning models for organ contouring in radiotherapy are poised for clinical usage, but currently, there exist few tools for automated quality assessment (QA) of the predicted contours. Using Bayesian models and their associated uncertainty, one can potentially automate the process of detecting inaccurate predictions. We investigate two Bayesian models for auto-contouring, DropOut and FlipOut…
▽ More
Deep learning models for organ contouring in radiotherapy are poised for clinical usage, but currently, there exist few tools for automated quality assessment (QA) of the predicted contours. Using Bayesian models and their associated uncertainty, one can potentially automate the process of detecting inaccurate predictions. We investigate two Bayesian models for auto-contouring, DropOut and FlipOut, using a quantitative measure - expected calibration error (ECE) and a qualitative measure - region-based accuracy-vs-uncertainty (R-AvU) graphs. It is well understood that a model should have low ECE to be considered trustworthy. However, in a QA context, a model should also have high uncertainty in inaccurate regions and low uncertainty in accurate regions. Such behaviour could direct visual attention of expert users to potentially inaccurate regions, leading to a speed up in the QA process. Using R-AvU graphs, we qualitatively compare the behaviour of different models in accurate and inaccurate regions. Experiments are conducted on the MICCAI2015 Head and Neck Segmentation Challenge and on the DeepMindTCIA CT dataset using three models: DropOut-DICE, Dropout-CE (Cross Entropy) and FlipOut-CE. Quantitative results show that DropOut-DICE has the highest ECE, while Dropout-CE and FlipOut-CE have the lowest ECE. To better understand the difference between DropOut-CE and FlipOut-CE, we use the R-AvU graph which shows that FlipOut-CE has better uncertainty coverage in inaccurate regions than DropOut-CE. Such a combination of quantitative and qualitative metrics explores a new approach that helps to select which model can be deployed as a QA tool in clinical settings.
△ Less
Submitted 3 February, 2022; v1 submitted 1 November, 2021;
originally announced November 2021.
-
Revisiting Process versus Product Metrics: a Large Scale Analysis
Authors:
Suvodeep Majumder,
Pranav Mody,
Tim Menzies
Abstract:
Numerous methods can build predictive models from software data. However, what methods and conclusions should we endorse as we move from analytics in-the-small (dealing with a handful of projects) to analytics in-the-large (dealing with hundreds of projects)?
To answer this question, we recheck prior small-scale results (about process versus product metrics for defect prediction and the granular…
▽ More
Numerous methods can build predictive models from software data. However, what methods and conclusions should we endorse as we move from analytics in-the-small (dealing with a handful of projects) to analytics in-the-large (dealing with hundreds of projects)?
To answer this question, we recheck prior small-scale results (about process versus product metrics for defect prediction and the granularity of metrics) using 722,471 commits from 700 Github projects. We find that some analytics in-the-small conclusions still hold when scaling up to analytics in-the-large. For example, like prior work, we see that process metrics are better predictors for defects than product metrics (best process/product-based learners respectively achieve recalls of 98\%/44\% and AUCs of 95\%/54\%, median values).
That said, we warn that it is unwise to trust metric importance results from analytics in-the-small studies since those change dramatically when moving to analytics in-the-large. Also, when reasoning in-the-large about hundreds of projects, it is better to use predictions from multiple models (since single model predictions can become confused and exhibit a high variance).
△ Less
Submitted 26 October, 2021; v1 submitted 21 August, 2020;
originally announced August 2020.
