Source author record

Fredrik Strand

Fredrik Strand appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

3works
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2021arXiv

Development and evaluation of a 3D annotation software for interactive COVID-19 lesion segmentation in chest CT

Segmentation of COVID-19 lesions from chest CT scans is of great importance for better diagnosing the disease and investigating its extent. However, manual segmentation can be very time consuming and subjective, given the lesions' large variation in shape, size and position. On the other hand, we still lack large manually segmented datasets that could be used for training machine learning-based models for fully automatic segmentation. In this work, we propose a new interactive and user-friendly tool for COVID-19 lesion segmentation, which works by alternating automatic steps (based on level-set segmentation and statistical shape modeling) with manual correction steps. The present software was tested by two different expertise groups: one group of three radiologists and one of three users with an engineering background. Promising segmentation results were obtained by both groups, which achieved satisfactory agreement both between- and within-group. Moreover, our interactive tool was shown to significantly speed up the lesion segmentation process, when compared to fully manual segmentation. Finally, we investigated inter-observer variability and how it is strongly influenced by several subjective factors, showing the importance for AI researchers and clinical doctors to be aware of the uncertainty in lesion segmentation results.

preprint2020arXiv

Adding Seemingly Uninformative Labels Helps in Low Data Regimes

Evidence suggests that networks trained on large datasets generalize well not solely because of the numerous training examples, but also class diversity which encourages learning of enriched features. This raises the question of whether this remains true when data is scarce - is there an advantage to learning with additional labels in low-data regimes? In this work, we consider a task that requires difficult-to-obtain expert annotations: tumor segmentation in mammography images. We show that, in low-data settings, performance can be improved by complementing the expert annotations with seemingly uninformative labels from non-expert annotators, turning the task into a multi-class problem. We reveal that these gains increase when less expert data is available, and uncover several interesting properties through further studies. We demonstrate our findings on CSAW-S, a new dataset that we introduce here, and confirm them on two public datasets.

preprint2020arXiv

Decoupling Inherent Risk and Early Cancer Signs in Image-based Breast Cancer Risk Models

The ability to accurately estimate risk of developing breast cancer would be invaluable for clinical decision-making. One promising new approach is to integrate image-based risk models based on deep neural networks. However, one must take care when using such models, as selection of training data influences the patterns the network will learn to identify. With this in mind, we trained networks using three different criteria to select the positive training data (i.e. images from patients that will develop cancer): an inherent risk model trained on images with no visible signs of cancer, a cancer signs model trained on images containing cancer or early signs of cancer, and a conflated model trained on all images from patients with a cancer diagnosis. We find that these three models learn distinctive features that focus on different patterns, which translates to contrasts in performance. Short-term risk is best estimated by the cancer signs model, whilst long-term risk is best estimated by the inherent risk model. Carelessly training with all images conflates inherent risk with early cancer signs, and yields sub-optimal estimates in both regimes. As a consequence, conflated models may lead physicians to recommend preventative action when early cancer signs are already visible.