↓ Skip to main content

3D Fully Convolutional Networks for Co-Segmentation of Tumors on PET-CT Images

Overview of attention for article published in 2011 IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging: From Nano to Macro, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#22 of 221)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

patent
4 patents

Readers on

mendeley
88 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
3D Fully Convolutional Networks for Co-Segmentation of Tumors on PET-CT Images
Published in
2011 IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging: From Nano to Macro, May 2018
DOI 10.1109/isbi.2018.8363561
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Positron emission tomography and computed tomography (PET-CT) dual-modality imaging provides critical diagnostic information in modern cancer diagnosis and therapy. Automated accurate tumor delineation is essentially important in computer-assisted tumor reading and interpretation based on PET-CT. In this paper, we propose a novel approach for the segmentation of lung tumors that combines the powerful fully convolutional networks (FCN) based semantic segmentation framework (3D-UNet) and the graph cut based co-segmentation model. First, two separate deep UNets are trained on PET and CT, separately, to learn high level discriminative features to generate tumor/non-tumor masks and probability maps for PET and CT images. Then, the two probability maps on PET and CT are further simultaneously employed in a graph cut based co-segmentation model to produce the final tumor segmentation results. Comparative experiments on 32 PET-CT scans of lung cancer patients demonstrate the effectiveness of our method.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 88 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 20%
Student > Master 18 20%
Researcher 9 10%
Student > Bachelor 7 8%
Other 4 5%
Other 7 8%
Unknown 25 28%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 28 32%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 14%
Engineering 10 11%
Physics and Astronomy 2 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 1%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 31 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 March 2026.
All research outputs
#5,037,948
of 33,982,974 outputs
Outputs from 2011 IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging: From Nano to Macro
#22
of 221 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,805
of 373,241 outputs
Outputs of similar age from 2011 IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging: From Nano to Macro
#3
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 33,982,974 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 221 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 373,241 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.