Multi-organ segmentation is a critical problem in medical image analysis due to its great value for computer-aided diagnosis, computer-aided surgery, and radiation therapy. Although fully-supervised segmentation methods can achieve good performance, they usually require a large amount of 3D data, such as CT scans, with voxel-wised annotations which are usually difficult, expensive, and slow to obtain. By contrast, large unannotated datasets of CT images are available. Inspired by the well-known semi-supervised learning framework co-training, we propose multi-planar co-training (MPCT), to generate more reliable pseudo-labels by enforcing consistency among multiple planes, i.e., saggital, coronal, and axial planes, of 3D unlabeled medical data, which play a vital role in our framework. Empirical results show that generating pseudo-labels by the multi-planar fusion rather than a single plane leads to a significant performance gain. We evaluate our approach on a new collected dataset and show that MPCT boosts the performance of a typical segmentation model, fully convolutional networks, by a large margin, when only a small set of labeled 3D data is available, i.e., 77.49 vs. 73.14 .
Early studies of abdominal organ segmentation focused on atlas-based methods @cite_34 @cite_10 @cite_20 . The frameworks are usually problematic because 1) they are not able to capture the large inter-subject variations of abdominal regions and 2) computational time is tightly dependent on the number of atlases. Recently, learning-based approaches with relatively large dataset have been introduced for multi-organ segmentation @cite_41 @cite_3 @cite_18 . Especially, deep Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) based methods have achieved a great success in the medical image segmentation @cite_21 @cite_5 @cite_19 @cite_32 @cite_2 @cite_14 @cite_48 in the last few years. Compared with multi-atlas-based approaches, CNNs based methods are generally more efficient and accurate. CNNs based methods for multi-organ segmentation can be divided into two major categories: 3D CNNs @cite_21 @cite_5 @cite_19 based and 2D CNNs @cite_32 @cite_2 @cite_14 @cite_48 based. 3D CNNs usually adopt the sliding-window strategy to avoid the problem, leading to high time complexity. Compared with 3D CNNs, 2D CNNs based algorithms can be directly end-to-end trained using 2D deep networks, which is less time-consuming.
@cite_18 @cite_14 @cite_41 @cite_48 @cite_21 @cite_32 @cite_3 @cite_19 @cite_2 @cite_5 @cite_34 @cite_10 @cite_20
2752123644 2608631154 2799142782 2952593890 2791680898 1667869507 2463818697 2000585255
A citing sentence is one that appears in a scientific article and cites previous work. Citing sentences have been studied and used in many applications. For example, they have been used in scientific paper summarization, automatic survey generation, paraphrase identification, and citation function classification. Citing sentences that cite multiple papers are common in scientific writing. This observation should be taken into consideration when using citing sentences in applications. For instance, when a citing sentence is used in a summary of a scientific paper, only the fragments of the sentence that are relevant to the summarized paper should be included in the summary. In this paper, we present and compare three different approaches for identifying the fragments of a citing sentence that are related to a given target reference. Our methods are: word classification, sequence labeling, and segment classification. Our experiments show that segment classification achieves the best results. Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to suggest an alternative to the widely used Times Cited criterion for analysing citation networks. The approach involves taking account of the natures of the papers that cite a given paper, so as to differentiate between papers that attract the same number of citations.Design methodology approach – ArticleRank is an algorithm that has been derived from Google's PageRank algorithm to measure the influence of journal articles. ArticleRank is applied to two datasets – a citation network based on an early paper on webometrics, and a self‐citation network based on the 19 most cited papers in the Journal of Documentation – using citation data taken from the Web of Knowledge database.Findings – ArticleRank values provide a different ranking of a set of papers from that provided by the corresponding Times Cited values, and overcomes the inability of the latter to differentiate between papers with the same numbers of citations. The difference in rankings between Times Cited ... Abstract Documents in computer-readable form can be used to provide information about other documents, i.e. those they cite. To do this efficiently requires procedures for computer recognition of citing statements. This is not easy, especially for multi-sentence citing statements. Computer recognition procedures have been developed which are accurate to the following extent: 73 of the words in statements selected by computer procedures as being citing statements are words which are correctly attributable to the corresponding documents. The retrieval effectiveness of computer-recognized citing statements was tested in the following way. First, for eight retrieval requests in inorganiic chemistry, average recall by search of Chemical Abstracts Service indexing and Chemical Abstracts abstract text words was found to be 50 . Words from citing statements referring to the papers to be retrieved were then added to the index terms and abstract words as additional access points, and searching was repeated. Average recall increased to 70 . Only words from citing statements published within a year of the cited papers were used. The retrieval effect of citing statement words alone (published within a year) without index or abstract terms was the following: average recall was 40 . When just the words of the titles of the cited papers were added to those citing statement words, average recall increased to 50 . In recent years scholars have built maps of science by connecting the academic fields that cite each other, are cited together, or that cite a similar literature. But since scholars cannot always publish in the fields they cite, or that cite them, these science maps are only rough proxies for the potential of a scholar, organization, or country, to enter a new academic field. Here we use a large dataset of scholarly publications disambiguated at the individual level to create a map of science-or research space-where links connect pairs of fields based on the probability that an individual has published in both of them. We find that the research space is a significantly more accurate predictor of the fields that individuals and organizations will enter in the future than citation based science maps. At the country level, however, the research space and citations based science maps are equally accurate. These findings show that data on career trajectories-the set of fields that individuals have previously published in-provide more accurate predictors of future research output for more focalized units-such as individuals or organizations-than citation based science maps.