Cited by 15Medical Image Segmentation TechniquesArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationAdvanced Neural Network Applications

Efficient Model Monitoring for Quality Control in Cardiac Image Segmentation

Open access
Galati, Francesco, Zuluaga, Maria A.·2021·Lecture Notes in Computer Science

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/978-3-030-78710-3_11

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Auto-encoder-like QC methods may not be best-suited to objects of interest that present highly variable spatial conformation between subjects and even between visits for the same subject.

    “These types of methods may however not be best-suited to objects of interest that present highly variable spatial conformation between subjects and even between visits for the same subject.”

    From Automatic quality control of segmentation results using early epochs as data augmentation: application to choroid plexuses (2024) · cites this paper as [21]

    The Introduction (p. 2) says the autoencoder models variability in cardiac segmentation masks, while its warning about major morphological deformations concerns an atlas-registration method, not autoencoder-based QC. The Discussion (p. 8) identifies poor sensitivity to small segmentation errors, but does not say these methods are ill-suited to variation between subjects or visits. Searches for spatial conformation and inter- or intra-subject variation found no passage making that claim. (LLM, conf=0.75)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Galati, F., & Zuluaga, M. A.
Affiliations
EURECOM (FR)
Venue
Lecture Notes in Computer Science
Published
2021
Volume
12738
Pages
101-111
ISSN
  • 0302-9743 (ISSN-L)
  • 1611-3349
OpenAlex
W3154425326
Cited by
15
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 5
FWCI
0.74
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Lecture notes in computer science (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR-19-P3IA-0002)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Medical Image Segmentation Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
Keywords
cardiac image segmentation, model monitoring, anomaly detection, quality control

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review