-
A self-supervised learning strategy for postoperative brain cavity segmentation simulating resections
Authors:
Fernando Pérez-García,
Reuben Dorent,
Michele Rizzi,
Francesco Cardinale,
Valerio Frazzini,
Vincent Navarro,
Caroline Essert,
Irène Ollivier,
Tom Vercauteren,
Rachel Sparks,
John S. Duncan,
Sébastien Ourselin
Abstract:
Accurate segmentation of brain resection cavities (RCs) aids in postoperative analysis and determining follow-up treatment. Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) are the state-of-the-art image segmentation technique, but require large annotated datasets for training. Annotation of 3D medical images is time-consuming, requires highly-trained raters, and may suffer from high inter-rater variability.…
▽ More
Accurate segmentation of brain resection cavities (RCs) aids in postoperative analysis and determining follow-up treatment. Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) are the state-of-the-art image segmentation technique, but require large annotated datasets for training. Annotation of 3D medical images is time-consuming, requires highly-trained raters, and may suffer from high inter-rater variability. Self-supervised learning strategies can leverage unlabeled data for training.
We developed an algorithm to simulate resections from preoperative magnetic resonance images (MRIs). We performed self-supervised training of a 3D CNN for RC segmentation using our simulation method. We curated EPISURG, a dataset comprising 430 postoperative and 268 preoperative MRIs from 430 refractory epilepsy patients who underwent resective neurosurgery. We fine-tuned our model on three small annotated datasets from different institutions and on the annotated images in EPISURG, comprising 20, 33, 19 and 133 subjects.
The model trained on data with simulated resections obtained median (interquartile range) Dice score coefficients (DSCs) of 81.7 (16.4), 82.4 (36.4), 74.9 (24.2) and 80.5 (18.7) for each of the four datasets. After fine-tuning, DSCs were 89.2 (13.3), 84.1 (19.8), 80.2 (20.1) and 85.2 (10.8). For comparison, inter-rater agreement between human annotators from our previous study was 84.0 (9.9).
We present a self-supervised learning strategy for 3D CNNs using simulated RCs to accurately segment real RCs on postoperative MRI. Our method generalizes well to data from different institutions, pathologies and modalities. Source code, segmentation models and the EPISURG dataset are available at https://github.com/fepegar/ressegijcars .
△ Less
Submitted 24 May, 2021;
originally announced May 2021.
-
Integrating Topological Proofs with Model Checking to Instrument Iterative Design
Authors:
Claudio Menghi,
Alessandro Maria Rizzi,
Anna Bernasconi
Abstract:
System development is not a linear, one-shot process. It proceeds through refinements and revisions. To support assurance that the system satisfies its requirements, it is desirable that continuous verification can be performed after each refinement or revision step. To achieve practical adoption, formal system modeling and verification must accommodate continuous verification efficiently and effe…
▽ More
System development is not a linear, one-shot process. It proceeds through refinements and revisions. To support assurance that the system satisfies its requirements, it is desirable that continuous verification can be performed after each refinement or revision step. To achieve practical adoption, formal system modeling and verification must accommodate continuous verification efficiently and effectively. Our proposal to address this problem is TOrPEDO, a verification approach where models are given via Partial Kripke Structures (PKSs) and requirements are specified as Linear-time Temporal Logic (LTL) properties. PKSs support refinement, by deliberately indicating unspecified parts of the model that are later completed. We support verification in two complementary forms: via model checking and proofs. Model checking is useful to provide counterexamples, i.e., pinpoint model behaviors that violate requirements. Proofs are instead useful since they can explain why requirements are satisfied. In our work, we introduce a specific concept of proof, called topological proof (TP). A TP produces a slice of the original PKS which justifies the property satisfaction. Because models can be incomplete, TOrPEDO supports reasoning on requirements satisfaction, violation, and possible satisfaction (in the case where the satisfaction depends on unknown parts).
△ Less
Submitted 26 November, 2018;
originally announced November 2018.
-
Support vector regression model for BigData systems
Authors:
Alessandro Maria Rizzi
Abstract:
Nowadays Big Data are becoming more and more important. Many sectors of our economy are now guided by data-driven decision processes. Big Data and business intelligence applications are facilitated by the MapReduce programming model while, at infrastructural layer, cloud computing provides flexible and cost effective solutions for allocating on demand large clusters. In such systems, capacity allo…
▽ More
Nowadays Big Data are becoming more and more important. Many sectors of our economy are now guided by data-driven decision processes. Big Data and business intelligence applications are facilitated by the MapReduce programming model while, at infrastructural layer, cloud computing provides flexible and cost effective solutions for allocating on demand large clusters. In such systems, capacity allocation, which is the ability to optimally size minimal resources for achieve a certain level of performance, is a key challenge to enhance performance for MapReduce jobs and minimize cloud resource costs. In order to do so, one of the biggest challenge is to build an accurate performance model to estimate job execution time of MapReduce systems. Previous works applied simulation based models for modeling such systems. Although this approach can accurately describe the behavior of Big Data clusters, it is too computationally expensive and does not scale to large system. We try to overcome these issues by applying machine learning techniques. More precisely we focus on Support Vector Regression (SVR) which is intrinsically more robust w.r.t other techniques, like, e.g., neural networks, and less sensitive to outliers in the training set. To better investigate these benefits, we compare SVR to linear regression.
△ Less
Submitted 5 December, 2016;
originally announced December 2016.
