Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
203,234 studies31 sourcesUpdated 11 min ago
PreprintCC BYbioRxiv

A public-data reproducibility benchmark of a 2.5-D U-Net with a slice-level topology term for type-B aortic dissection segmentation

  1. 1Department of Cardiology, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University; Institutes of Biomedical Sciences, Fudan University

Abstract

Background: Type-B aortic dissection requires separation of the true and false lumina in heterogeneous, anisotropic CTA. A topology term may reduce fragmentation, but its reproducibility must be tested under a fixed case split and independent native-grid evaluation. Methods: We used the public Graz type-B aortic dissection CTA collection (40 cases; CC BY 4.0) and froze a 28/6/6 case split for training, development, and held-out testing. A compact 2.5-D U-Net trained with cross-entropy plus multiclass Dice was compared with the identical model augmented by a fixed-weight (0.5) differentiable slice-level soft clDice term. Two training seeds were run for each arm. All 40 cases passed the NRRD audit; predictions for six held-out cases were restored to their native grids and scored with case-level 3-D voxel-grid Dice, voxel-grid morphological clDice, 6-connected component counts, physical-volume error, and 2,000-resample case-level paired bootstrap intervals. Results: With seed 20261007, topology-minus-baseline differences were -0.028 (95% CI -0.053 to -0.004) for true-lumen Dice, +0.032 (-0.006 to +0.096) for true-lumen voxel-grid clDice, +0.071 (+0.037 to +0.103) for false-lumen Dice, and +0.073 (+0.048 to +0.103) for false-lumen voxel-grid clDice. With seed 20261008, the corresponding differences were -0.040 (-0.065 to -0.018), +0.013 (-0.034 to +0.071), -0.099 (-0.187 to -0.004), and -0.058 (-0.124 to -0.001). Descriptive pooled means over 12 case rows per arm were true-lumen Dice 0.577 for topology versus 0.611 for baseline and false-lumen Dice 0.409 versus 0.422; these pooled rows are not independent cases. Conclusions: Under this fixed six-case test split, the corrected slice-level topology term did not produce a consistent benefit. True-lumen Dice was lower in both seeds, while false-lumen effects reversed direction between seeds; topology-clDice changes were small and/or interval-crossing. The benchmark supports an auditable failure-analysis workflow but does not support a general topology benefit, clinical use, external generalization, or a panvascular decision system.

Related

  1. An agent-built, verified atlas of public spatial transcriptomics shows that breadth across studies drives transfer and reproducibility
    J.-H. Ji, Q. Zou, J. Cheng +7
    bioRxivPreprintCC BY-NC-NDFull textBioinformatics & computational biologybioRxiv
  2. Canopy and leaf vein segmentation and topology-guided localization of stem points in tobacco plants using YOLO-ODS
    Jiaxing Qing, Donghao Li, Xiwen Luo +7
    Frontiers in Plant SciencePeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full textPlant biologyCrossrefEurope PMC
  3. Centered cross-context perturbation transfer on the public 2025 Virtual Cell Challenge benchmark
    H. Luan, L. Chen, G. Yu +1
    bioRxivPreprintCC BYFull textBioinformatics & computational biologybioRxiv
  4. Accuracy, Precision, and Reproducibility of Four T1 Mapping Sequences: A Head-to-Head Comparison of MOLLI, ShMOLLI, SASHA, and SAPPHIRE
    Sébastien Roujol, Sebastian Weingärtner, Murilo Foppa +7
    RadiologyPeer-reviewedLicence not stated317 citedSystems & synthetic biologyHAL
  5. High reproducibility demonstrated in a direct-to-consumer microbiome testing workflow under real-world conditions using fecal reference material
    J. M. Trachsel, H. Sturgeon, D. M. Goad +4
    bioRxivPreprintAll rights reservedFull textMicrobiologybioRxiv
BibTeX
@misc{you2026publicdata,
  title = {{A public-data reproducibility benchmark of a 2.5-D U-Net with a slice-level topology term for type-B aortic dissection segmentation}},
  author = {L. You and Y. Guo and X. Zhong and Z. Peng and W. Wang and L. Shen and J. Ge},
  howpublished = {bioRxiv},
  year = {2026},
  month = oct,
  doi = {10.64898/2026.10.07.757473},
  url = {https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.10.07.757473v1},
  note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY  - UNPB
TI  - A public-data reproducibility benchmark of a 2.5-D U-Net with a slice-level topology term for type-B aortic dissection segmentation
AU  - L. You
AU  - Y. Guo
AU  - X. Zhong
AU  - Z. Peng
AU  - W. Wang
AU  - L. Shen
AU  - J. Ge
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/07
PB  - bioRxiv
DO  - 10.64898/2026.10.07.757473
UR  - https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.10.07.757473v1
AB  - Background: Type-B aortic dissection requires separation of the true and false lumina in heterogeneous, anisotropic CTA. A topology term may reduce fragmentation, but its reproducibility must be tested under a fixed case split and independent native-grid evaluation. Methods: We used the public Graz type-B aortic dissection CTA collection (40 cases; CC BY 4.0) and froze a 28/6/6 case split for training, development, and held-out testing. A compact 2.5-D U-Net trained with cross-entropy plus multiclass Dice was compared with the identical model augmented by a fixed-weight (0.5) differentiable slice-level soft clDice term. Two training seeds were run for each arm. All 40 cases passed the NRRD audit; predictions for six held-out cases were restored to their native grids and scored with case-level 3-D voxel-grid Dice, voxel-grid morphological clDice, 6-connected component counts, physical-volume error, and 2,000-resample case-level paired bootstrap intervals. Results: With seed 20261007, topology-minus-baseline differences were -0.028 (95% CI -0.053 to -0.004) for true-lumen Dice, +0.032 (-0.006 to +0.096) for true-lumen voxel-grid clDice, +0.071 (+0.037 to +0.103) for false-lumen Dice, and +0.073 (+0.048 to +0.103) for false-lumen voxel-grid clDice. With seed 20261008, the corresponding differences were -0.040 (-0.065 to -0.018), +0.013 (-0.034 to +0.071), -0.099 (-0.187 to -0.004), and -0.058 (-0.124 to -0.001). Descriptive pooled means over 12 case rows per arm were true-lumen Dice 0.577 for topology versus 0.611 for baseline and false-lumen Dice 0.409 versus 0.422; these pooled rows are not independent cases. Conclusions: Under this fixed six-case test split, the corrected slice-level topology term did not produce a consistent benefit. True-lumen Dice was lower in both seeds, while false-lumen effects reversed direction between seeds; topology-clDice changes were small and/or interval-crossing. The benchmark supports an auditable failure-analysis workflow but does not support a general topology benefit, clinical use, external generalization, or a panvascular decision system.
ER  -