Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

The International Workshop on Osteoarthritis Imaging Knee MRI Segmentation Challenge: A Multi-Institute Evaluation and Analysis Framework on a Standardized Dataset

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2004.14003 v2 pith:OEPHRKWV submitted 2020-04-29 eess.IV cs.CV

classification eess.IVcs.CV
keywords weresegmentationthicknesschallengekneenetworkscartilagecorrelations
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Purpose: To organize a knee MRI segmentation challenge for characterizing the semantic and clinical efficacy of automatic segmentation methods relevant for monitoring osteoarthritis progression. Methods: A dataset partition consisting of 3D knee MRI from 88 subjects at two timepoints with ground-truth articular (femoral, tibial, patellar) cartilage and meniscus segmentations was standardized. Challenge submissions and a majority-vote ensemble were evaluated using Dice score, average symmetric surface distance, volumetric overlap error, and coefficient of variation on a hold-out test set. Similarities in network segmentations were evaluated using pairwise Dice correlations. Articular cartilage thickness was computed per-scan and longitudinally. Correlation between thickness error and segmentation metrics was measured using Pearson's coefficient. Two empirical upper bounds for ensemble performance were computed using combinations of model outputs that consolidated true positives and true negatives. Results: Six teams (T1-T6) submitted entries for the challenge. No significant differences were observed across all segmentation metrics for all tissues (p=1.0) among the four top-performing networks (T2, T3, T4, T6). Dice correlations between network pairs were high (>0.85). Per-scan thickness errors were negligible among T1-T4 (p=0.99) and longitudinal changes showed minimal bias (<0.03mm). Low correlations (<0.41) were observed between segmentation metrics and thickness error. The majority-vote ensemble was comparable to top performing networks (p=1.0). Empirical upper bound performances were similar for both combinations (p=1.0). Conclusion: Diverse networks learned to segment the knee similarly where high segmentation accuracy did not correlate to cartilage thickness accuracy. Voting ensembles did not outperform individual networks but may help regularize individual models.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Putting the Segment Anything Model to the Test with 3D Knee MRI - A Comparison with State-of-the-Art Performance

    eess.IV 2025-04 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    On meniscus segmentation from 3D knee MRI, end-to-end fine-tuned SAM matches 3D U-Net in Dice score but remains inferior in Hausdorff distance, while decoder-only SAM performs worse on both.

Pith tools