Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
110 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
56 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
44 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
6 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
47 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Give me (un)certainty -- An exploration of parameters that affect segmentation uncertainty (1911.06357v1)

Published 14 Nov 2019 in eess.IV, cs.CV, and cs.LG

Abstract: Segmentation tasks in medical imaging are inherently ambiguous: the boundary of a target structure is oftentimes unclear due to image quality and biological factors. As such, predicted segmentations from deep learning algorithms are inherently ambiguous. Additionally, "ground truth" segmentations performed by human annotators are in fact weak labels that further increase the uncertainty of outputs of supervised models developed on these manual labels. To date, most deep learning segmentation studies utilize predicted segmentations without uncertainty quantification. In contrast, we explore the use of Monte Carlo dropout U-Nets for the segmentation with additional quantification of segmentation uncertainty. We assess the utility of three measures of uncertainty (Coefficient of Variation, Mean Pairwise Dice, and Mean Voxelwise Uncertainty) for the segmentation of a less ambiguous target structure (liver) and a more ambiguous one (liver tumors). Furthermore, we assess how the utility of these measures changes with different patch sizes and cost functions. Our results suggest that models trained using larger patches and the weighted categorical cross-entropy as cost function allow the extraction of more meaningful uncertainty measures compared to smaller patches and soft dice loss. Among the three uncertainty measures Mean Pairwise Dice shows the strongest correlation with segmentation quality. Our study serves as a proof-of-concept of how uncertainty measures can be used to assess the quality of a predicted segmentation, potentially serving to flag low quality segmentations from a given model for further human review.

User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (5)
  1. Katharina Hoebel (10 papers)
  2. Ken Chang (28 papers)
  3. Jay Patel (17 papers)
  4. Praveer Singh (17 papers)
  5. Jayashree Kalpathy-Cramer (43 papers)
Citations (7)

Summary

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