ArticleJournal of medical physics
Assessment of Optimizers and their Performance in Autosegmenting Lung Tumors.
Article in Journal of medical physics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- AI-Based Dose Compliance of Secondary Organs at Risk in Head and Neck Cancer Radiotherapy.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- An advanced automated pipeline for brain tumour segmentation on magnetic resonance imaging for gamma knife radiosurgery.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Discrepancies between Fundus Photography and Multimodal Imaging in Mapping of Choroidal Tumor Borders.Ophthalmology science · 2026Article
- Optimizing MRI annotation workflows for high-accuracy deep learning thigh muscle segmentation in athletes.Radiology advances · 2026Article
- CervSpineNet: a hybrid deep learning-based approach for the segmentation of cervical spinous processes.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Optimizers are widely utilized across various domains to enhance desired outcomes by either maximizing or minimizing objective functions. In the context of deep learning, they help to minimize the loss function and improve model's performance. This study aims to evaluate the accuracy of different optimizers employed for autosegmentation of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) target volumes on thoracic computed tomography images utilized in oncology. Materials and Methods: The study utilized 112 patients, comprising 92 patients from "The Cancer Imaging Archive" (TCIA) and 20 of our local clinical patients, to evaluate the efficacy of various optimizers. The gross tumor volume was selected as the foreground mask for training and testing the models. Of the 92 TCIA patients, 57 were used for training and validation, and the remaining 35 for testing using nnU-Net. The performance of the final model was further evaluated on the 20 local clinical patient datasets. Six different optimizers, namely AdaDelta, AdaGrad, Adam, NAdam, RMSprop, and stochastic gradient descent (SGD), were investigated. To assess the agreement between the predicted volume and the ground truth, several metrics including Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), Jaccard index, sensitivity, precision, Hausdorff distance (HD), 95 Results: The DSC values for AdaDelta, AdaGrad, Adam, NAdam, RMSprop, and SGD were 0.75, 0.84, 0.85, 0.84, 0.83, and 0.81, respectively, for the TCIA test data. However, when the model trained on TCIA datasets was applied to the clinical datasets, the DSC, HD, HD95, and ASSD metrics showed a statistically significant decrease in performance compared to the TCIA test datasets, indicating the presence of image and/or mask heterogeneity between the data sources. Conclusion: The choice of optimizer in deep learning is a critical factor that can significantly impact the performance of autosegmentation models. However, it is worth noting that the behavior of optimizers may vary when applied to new clinical datasets, which can lead to changes in models' performance. Therefore, selecting the appropriate optimizer for a specific task is essential to ensure optimal performance and generalizability of the model to different datasets.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.