Cargando…

Simulated MRI Artifacts: Testing Machine Learning Failure Modes

Objective. Seven types of MRI artifacts, including acquisition and preprocessing errors, were simulated to test a machine learning brain tumor segmentation model for potential failure modes. Introduction. Real-world medical deployments of machine learning algorithms are less common than the number o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wang, Nicholas C., Noll, Douglas C., Srinivasan, Ashok, Gagnon-Bartsch, Johann, Kim, Michelle M., Rao, Arvind
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: AAAS 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10521705/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37850164
http://dx.doi.org/10.34133/2022/9807590
_version_ 1785110189164199936
author Wang, Nicholas C.
Noll, Douglas C.
Srinivasan, Ashok
Gagnon-Bartsch, Johann
Kim, Michelle M.
Rao, Arvind
author_facet Wang, Nicholas C.
Noll, Douglas C.
Srinivasan, Ashok
Gagnon-Bartsch, Johann
Kim, Michelle M.
Rao, Arvind
author_sort Wang, Nicholas C.
collection PubMed
description Objective. Seven types of MRI artifacts, including acquisition and preprocessing errors, were simulated to test a machine learning brain tumor segmentation model for potential failure modes. Introduction. Real-world medical deployments of machine learning algorithms are less common than the number of medical research papers using machine learning. Part of the gap between the performance of models in research and deployment comes from a lack of hard test cases in the data used to train a model. Methods. These failure modes were simulated for a pretrained brain tumor segmentation model that utilizes standard MRI and used to evaluate the performance of the model under duress. These simulated MRI artifacts consisted of motion, susceptibility induced signal loss, aliasing, field inhomogeneity, sequence mislabeling, sequence misalignment, and skull stripping failures. Results. The artifact with the largest effect was the simplest, sequence mislabeling, though motion, field inhomogeneity, and sequence misalignment also caused significant performance decreases. The model was most susceptible to artifacts affecting the FLAIR (fluid attenuation inversion recovery) sequence. Conclusion. Overall, these simulated artifacts could be used to test other brain MRI models, but this approach could be used across medical imaging applications.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10521705
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher AAAS
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-105217052023-10-17 Simulated MRI Artifacts: Testing Machine Learning Failure Modes Wang, Nicholas C. Noll, Douglas C. Srinivasan, Ashok Gagnon-Bartsch, Johann Kim, Michelle M. Rao, Arvind BME Front Research Article Objective. Seven types of MRI artifacts, including acquisition and preprocessing errors, were simulated to test a machine learning brain tumor segmentation model for potential failure modes. Introduction. Real-world medical deployments of machine learning algorithms are less common than the number of medical research papers using machine learning. Part of the gap between the performance of models in research and deployment comes from a lack of hard test cases in the data used to train a model. Methods. These failure modes were simulated for a pretrained brain tumor segmentation model that utilizes standard MRI and used to evaluate the performance of the model under duress. These simulated MRI artifacts consisted of motion, susceptibility induced signal loss, aliasing, field inhomogeneity, sequence mislabeling, sequence misalignment, and skull stripping failures. Results. The artifact with the largest effect was the simplest, sequence mislabeling, though motion, field inhomogeneity, and sequence misalignment also caused significant performance decreases. The model was most susceptible to artifacts affecting the FLAIR (fluid attenuation inversion recovery) sequence. Conclusion. Overall, these simulated artifacts could be used to test other brain MRI models, but this approach could be used across medical imaging applications. AAAS 2022-11-01 /pmc/articles/PMC10521705/ /pubmed/37850164 http://dx.doi.org/10.34133/2022/9807590 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Exclusive Licensee Suzhou Institute of Biomedical Engineering and Technology, CAS. Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0).
spellingShingle Research Article
Wang, Nicholas C.
Noll, Douglas C.
Srinivasan, Ashok
Gagnon-Bartsch, Johann
Kim, Michelle M.
Rao, Arvind
Simulated MRI Artifacts: Testing Machine Learning Failure Modes
title Simulated MRI Artifacts: Testing Machine Learning Failure Modes
title_full Simulated MRI Artifacts: Testing Machine Learning Failure Modes
title_fullStr Simulated MRI Artifacts: Testing Machine Learning Failure Modes
title_full_unstemmed Simulated MRI Artifacts: Testing Machine Learning Failure Modes
title_short Simulated MRI Artifacts: Testing Machine Learning Failure Modes
title_sort simulated mri artifacts: testing machine learning failure modes
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10521705/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37850164
http://dx.doi.org/10.34133/2022/9807590
work_keys_str_mv AT wangnicholasc simulatedmriartifactstestingmachinelearningfailuremodes
AT nolldouglasc simulatedmriartifactstestingmachinelearningfailuremodes
AT srinivasanashok simulatedmriartifactstestingmachinelearningfailuremodes
AT gagnonbartschjohann simulatedmriartifactstestingmachinelearningfailuremodes
AT kimmichellem simulatedmriartifactstestingmachinelearningfailuremodes
AT raoarvind simulatedmriartifactstestingmachinelearningfailuremodes