Does embryo categorization by existing artificial intelligence, morphokinetic or morphological embryo selection models correlate with blastocyst euploidy rates?

RESEARCH QUESTION: Does embryo categorization by existing artificial intelligence (AI), morphokinetic or morphological embryo selection models correlate with blastocyst euploidy? DESIGN: A total of 834 patients (mean maternal age 40.5 ± 3.4 years) who underwent preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies (PGT-A) on a total of 3573 tested blastocysts were included in this retrospective study. The cycles were stratified into five maternal age groups according to the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology age groups (<35, 35-37, 38-40, 41-42 and >42 years). The main outcome of this study was the correlation of euploidy rates in stratified maternal age groups and an automated AI model (iDAScore® v1.0), a morphokinetic embryo selection model (KIDScore Day 5 ver 3, KS-D5) and a traditional morphological grading model (Gardner criteria), respectively. RESULTS: Euploidy rates were significantly correlated with iDAScore (P = 0.0035 to <0.001) in all age groups, and expect for the youngest age group, with KS-D5 and Gardner criteria (all P < 0.0001). Additionally, multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that for all models, higher scores were significantly correlated with euploidy (all P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: These results show that existing blastocyst scoring models correlate with ploidy status. However, as these models were developed to indicate implantation potential, they cannot accurately diagnose if an embryo is euploid or aneuploid. Instead, they may be used to support the decision of how many and which blastocysts to biopsy, thus potentially reducing patient costs.

Robust and generalizable embryo selection based on artificial intelligence and time-lapse image sequences.

Assessing and selecting the most viable embryos for transfer is an essential part of in vitro fertilization (IVF). In recent years, several approaches have been made to improve and automate the procedure using artificial intelligence (AI) and deep learning. Based on images of embryos with known implantation data (KID), AI models have been trained to automatically score embryos related to their chance of achieving a successful implantation. However, as of now, only limited research has been conducted to evaluate how embryo selection models generalize to new clinics and how they perform in subgroup analyses across various conditions. In this paper, we investigate how a deep learning-based embryo selection model using only time-lapse image sequences performs across different patient ages and clinical conditions, and how it correlates with traditional morphokinetic parameters. The model was trained and evaluated based on a large dataset from 18 IVF centers consisting of 115,832 embryos, of which 14,644 embryos were transferred KID embryos. In an independent test set, the AI model sorted KID embryos with an area under the curve (AUC) of a receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.67 and all embryos with an AUC of 0.95. A clinic hold-out test showed that the model generalized to new clinics with an AUC range of 0.60-0.75 for KID embryos. Across different subgroups of age, insemination method, incubation time, and transfer protocol, the AUC ranged between 0.63 and 0.69. Furthermore, model predictions correlated positively with blastocyst grading and negatively with direct cleavages. The fully automated iDAScore v1.0 model was shown to perform at least as good as a state-of-the-art manual embryo selection model. Moreover, full automatization of embryo scoring implies fewer manual evaluations and eliminates biases due to inter- and intraobserver variation.

Embryo selection with artificial intelligence: how to evaluate and compare methods?

Embryo selection within in vitro fertilization (IVF) is the process of evaluating qualities of fertilized oocytes (embryos) and selecting the best embryo(s) available within a patient cohort for subsequent transfer or cryopreservation. In recent years, artificial intelligence (AI) has been used extensively to improve and automate the embryo ranking and selection procedure by extracting relevant information from embryo microscopy images. The AI models are evaluated based on their ability to identify the embryo(s) with the highest chance(s) of achieving a successful pregnancy. Whether such evaluations should be based on ranking performance or pregnancy prediction, however, seems to divide studies. As such, a variety of performance metrics are reported, and comparisons between studies are often made on different outcomes and data foundations. Moreover, superiority of AI methods over manual human evaluation is often claimed based on retrospective data, without any mentions of potential bias. In this paper, we provide a technical view on some of the major topics that divide how current AI models are trained, evaluated and compared. We explain and discuss the most common evaluation metrics and relate them to the two separate evaluation objectives, ranking and prediction. We also discuss when and how to compare AI models across studies and explain in detail how a selection bias is inevitable when comparing AI models against current embryo selection practice in retrospective cohort studies.

FieldSAFE: Dataset for Obstacle Detection in Agriculture.

In this paper, we present a multi-modal dataset for obstacle detection in agriculture. The dataset comprises approximately 2 h of raw sensor data from a tractor-mounted sensor system in a grass mowing scenario in Denmark, October 2016. Sensing modalities include stereo camera, thermal camera, web camera, 360 ∘ camera, LiDAR and radar, while precise localization is available from fused IMU and GNSS. Both static and moving obstacles are present, including humans, mannequin dolls, rocks, barrels, buildings, vehicles and vegetation. All obstacles have ground truth object labels and geographic coordinates.