2022
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-98253-9_30
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparing Deep Learning and Conventional Machine Learning for Outcome Prediction of Head and Neck Cancer in PET/CT

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In [27], Ren et al (team "Aarhus Oslo") team compared a conventional radiomics approach (although without tumor delineation, i.e., features were extracted from the whole bounding-box) and a deep learning approach in Task 2 only. Both used the provided bounding-box of PET and CT images as inputs, and in the case of the deep learning approach, an additional pre-processing step was applied to PET images in order to reduce the variability of images due to various centers based on a sin transform.…”
Section: Results: Reporting Of Challenge Outcomementioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In [27], Ren et al (team "Aarhus Oslo") team compared a conventional radiomics approach (although without tumor delineation, i.e., features were extracted from the whole bounding-box) and a deep learning approach in Task 2 only. Both used the provided bounding-box of PET and CT images as inputs, and in the case of the deep learning approach, an additional pre-processing step was applied to PET images in order to reduce the variability of images due to various centers based on a sin transform.…”
Section: Results: Reporting Of Challenge Outcomementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Individual participants' papers reporting their methods and results were submitted to the challenge organizers. Reviews were organized by the organizers and the papers of the participants are published in the LNCS challenges proceedings [60,1,52,56,59,12,53,62,21,32,43,37,54,6,67,16,9,48,49,58,40,51,17,46,65,39,33,45,27]. When participating in multiple tasks, participants could submit one or multiple papers.…”
Section: Introduction: Research Contextmentioning
confidence: 99%