Cited by 32Advanced Neural Network ApplicationsMedical Image Segmentation TechniquesArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education

High performance neural network inference, streaming, and visualization of medical images using FAST

Open access
Smistad, Erik, Ostvik, Andreas, Pedersen, Andre·2019·IEEE Access

Abstract

Deep convolutional neural networks have quickly become the standard for medical image analysis. Although there are many frameworks focusing on training neural networks, there are few that focus on high performance inference and visualization of medical images. Neural network inference requires an inference engine (IE), and there are currently several IEs available including Intel's OpenVINO, NVIDIA's TensorRT, and Google's TensorFlow which supports multiple backends, including NVIDIA's cuDNN, AMD's ROCm and Intel's MKL-DNN. These IEs only work on specific processors and have completely different application programming interfaces (APIs). In this paper, we presents methods for extending FAST, an open-source high performance framework for medical imaging, to use any IE with a common programming interface. Thereby making it easier for users to deploy and test their neural networks on different processors. This article provides an overview of current IEs and how they can be combined with existing software such as FAST. The methods are demonstrated and evaluated on three performance demanding medical use cases: real-time ultrasound image segmentation, computed tomography (CT) volume segmentation, and patch-wise classification of whole slide microscopy images. Runtime performance was measured on the three use cases with several different IEs and processors. This revealed that the choice of IE and processor can affect performance of medical neural network image analysis considerably. In the most extreme case of processing 171 ultrasound frames, the difference between the fastest and slowest configuration were half a second vs. 24 seconds. For volume processing, using the CPU or the GPU, showed a difference of 2 vs. 53 seconds, and for processing an whole slide microscopy image, the difference was 81 seconds vs. almost 16 minutes. Source code, binary releases and test data can be found online on GitHub at https://github.com/smistad/FAST/.

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 · 10.1109/access.2019.2942441

Cites

15 of 15 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?

  • TensorRT can provide low-latency, high-throughput deployment reasoning for embedded platforms such as autonomous driving and security monitoring.

    “TensorRT [38] to accelerate model inference. The basic principle is to optimize the GPU characteristics, network layer fusion computing, and accuracy during inference. It can provide low-latency, high-throughput deployment reasoning for embedded platforms such as autonomous driving and security monitoring.”

    From Edge YOLO: Real-Time Intelligent Object Detection System Based on Edge-Cloud Cooperation in Autonomous Vehicles (2022) · cites this paper as [38]

    The “3) TENSORRT” section says TensorRT enables high-performance inference on NVIDIA GPUs through precision calibration, layer fusing, and kernel auto-tuning. The Discussion reports 2-millisecond ultrasound-image segmentation inference, supporting low latency in that medical-imaging test. The paper does not establish throughput or deployment on embedded platforms for autonomous driving or security monitoring. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    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

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. A. Østvik, L. E. Bø, and E. Smistad, ''EchoBot: An open-source robotic ultrasound system,'' in Proc. IPCAI, 2019, pp. 1-4. [Online]. Available: http://www.ipcai2019.org/pdf/Long_Abstracts/Ostvik_etal_IPCAI _2019_Long_Abstract.pdf
  2. J. Comput. Assist. Radiol. Surg., vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 607-620, 2013.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Smistad, E., Ostvik, A., & Pedersen, A.
Affiliations
  • Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NO)
  • SINTEF (NO)
Venue
IEEE Access
Published
2019
Volume
7
Pages
136310-136321
ISSN
2169-3536 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2973444803
Cited by
32
References
15
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5
FWCI
1.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Access (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Norges Forskningsråd (270941, 237887)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Medical Image Segmentation Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Keywords
neural network inference, inference engine, FAST framework, medical image analysis, ultrasound image segmentation, GPU acceleration, real-time processing, streaming, visualization, open source software

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