Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Detailed Answer
Quick Answer
Concise responses based on abstracts only
Detailed Answer
Well-researched responses based on abstracts and relevant paper content.
Custom Instructions Pro
Preferences or requirements that you'd like Emergent Mind to consider when generating responses
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 100 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 51 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 26 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 33 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 103 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 200 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 447 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4 36 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

3D medical image segmentation with labeled and unlabeled data using autoencoders at the example of liver segmentation in CT images (2003.07923v1)

Published 17 Mar 2020 in eess.IV and cs.CV

Abstract: Automatic segmentation of anatomical structures with convolutional neural networks (CNNs) constitutes a large portion of research in medical image analysis. The majority of CNN-based methods rely on an abundance of labeled data for proper training. Labeled medical data is often scarce, but unlabeled data is more widely available. This necessitates approaches that go beyond traditional supervised learning and leverage unlabeled data for segmentation tasks. This work investigates the potential of autoencoder-extracted features to improve segmentation with a CNN. Two strategies were considered. First, transfer learning where pretrained autoencoder features were used as initialization for the convolutional layers in the segmentation network. Second, multi-task learning where the tasks of segmentation and feature extraction, by means of input reconstruction, were learned and optimized simultaneously. A convolutional autoencoder was used to extract features from unlabeled data and a multi-scale, fully convolutional CNN was used to perform the target task of 3D liver segmentation in CT images. For both strategies, experiments were conducted with varying amounts of labeled and unlabeled training data. The proposed learning strategies improved results in $75\%$ of the experiments compared to training from scratch and increased the dice score by up to $0.040$ and $0.024$ for a ratio of unlabeled to labeled training data of about $32 : 1$ and $12.5 : 1$, respectively. The results indicate that both training strategies are more effective with a large ratio of unlabeled to labeled training data.

Citations (3)
List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Dice Question Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Follow-Up Questions

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.