Paper detail

Analyzing Epistemic and Aleatoric Uncertainty for Drusen Segmentation in Optical Coherence Tomography Images

Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is one of the leading causes of permanent vision loss in people aged over 60 years. Accurate segmentation of biomarkers such as drusen that points to the early stages of AMD is crucial in preventing further vision impairment. However, segmenting drusen is extremely challenging due to their varied sizes and appearances, low contrast and noise resemblance. Most existing literature, therefore, have focused on size estimation of drusen using classification, leaving the challenge of accurate segmentation less tackled. Additionally, obtaining the pixel-wise annotations is extremely costly and such labels can often be noisy, suffering from inter-observer and intra-observer variability. Quantification of uncertainty associated with segmentation tasks offers principled measures to inspect the segmentation output. Realizing its utility in identifying erroneous segmentation and the potential applications in clinical decision making, here we develop a U-Net based drusen segmentation model and quantify the segmentation uncertainty. We investigate epistemic and aleatoric uncertainty capturing model confidence and data uncertainty respectively. We present segmentation results and show how uncertainty can help formulate robust evaluation strategies. We visually inspect the pixel-wise uncertainty and segmentation results on test images. We finally analyze the correlation between segmentation uncertainty and accuracy. Our results demonstrate the utility of leveraging uncertainties in developing and explaining segmentation models for medical image analysis.

preprint2021arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.