ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2024
An Analysis of Loss Functions for Heavily Imbalanced Lesion Segmentation.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Research on the classification method of unbalanced data for the assessment of traffic accident disability level].Sheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 2026Article
- Multi-plane attention guided 3D nnU-Net for MRI-based cervical cancer segmentation.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Heavily imbalanced datasets are common in lesion segmentation. Specifically, the lesions usually comprise less than 5% of the whole image volume when dealing with brain MRI. A common solution when training with a limited dataset is the use of specific loss functions that rebalance the effect of background and foreground voxels. These approaches are usually evaluated running a single cross-validation split without taking into account other possible random aspects that might affect the true improvement of the final metric (i.e., random weight initialisation or random shuffling). Furthermore, the evolution of the effect of the loss on the heavily imbalanced class is usually not analysed during the training phase. In this work, we present an analysis of different common loss metrics during training on public datasets dealing with brain lesion segmentation in heavy imbalanced datasets. In order to limit the effect of hyperparameter tuning and architecture, we chose a 3D Unet architecture due to its ability to provide good performance on different segmentation applications. We evaluated this framework on two public datasets and we observed that weighted losses have a similar performance on average, even though heavily weighting the gradient of the foreground class gives better performance in terms of true positive segmentation.
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.