RESUMEN
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: We examined the effectiveness of computed tomography (CT)-based deep learning (DL) models in differentiating benign and malignant solid pulmonary nodules (SPNs) ≤ 8 mm. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study patients (n = 719) were divided into internal training, internal validation, and external validation cohorts; all had small SPNs and had undergone preoperative chest CTs and surgical resection. We developed five DL models incorporating features of the nodule and five different peri-nodular regions with the Multiscale Dual Attention Network (MDANet) to differentiate benign and malignant SPNs. We selected the best-performing model, which was then compared to four conventional algorithms (VGG19, ResNet50, ResNeXt50, and DenseNet121). Furthermore, another five DL models were constructed using MDANet to distinguish benign tumors from inflammatory nodules and the one performed best was selected out. RESULTS: Model 4, which incorporated the nodule and 15 mm peri-nodular region, best differentiated benign and malignant SPNs. The model had an area under the curve (AUC), accuracy, recall, precision, and F1-score of 0.730, 0.724, 0.711, 0.705, and 0.707 in the external validation cohort. Model 4 also performed better than the other four conventional algorithms. Model 8, which incorporated the nodule and 10 mm peri-nodular region, was the best model for distinguishing benign tumors from inflammatory nodules. The model had an AUC, accuracy, recall, precision, and F1-score of 0.871, 0.938, 0.863, 0.904, and 0.882 in the external validation cohort. CONCLUSION: The study concludes that CT-based DL models built with MDANet can accurately discriminate among small benign and malignant SPNs, benign tumors and inflammatory nodules.
RESUMEN
A complete error calibration model with 12 independent parameters is established by analyzing the three-axis magnetometer error mechanism. The said model conforms to an ellipsoid restriction, the parameters of the ellipsoid equation are estimated, and the ellipsoid coefficient matrix is derived. However, the calibration matrix cannot be determined completely, as there are fewer ellipsoid parameters than calibration model parameters. Mathematically, the calibration matrix derived from the ellipsoid coefficient matrix by a different matrix decomposition method is not unique, and there exists an unknown rotation matrix R between them. This paper puts forward a constant intersection angle method (angles between the geomagnetic field and gravitational field are fixed) to estimate R. The Tikhonov method is adopted to solve the problem that rounding errors or other errors may seriously affect the calculation results of R when the condition number of the matrix is very large. The geomagnetic field vector and heading error are further corrected by R. The constant intersection angle method is convenient and practical, as it is free from any additional calibration procedure or coordinate transformation. In addition, the simulation experiment indicates that the heading error declines from ±1° calibrated by classical ellipsoid fitting to ±0.2° calibrated by a constant intersection angle method, and the signal-to-noise ratio is 50 dB. The actual experiment exhibits that the heading error is further corrected from ±0.8° calibrated by the classical ellipsoid fitting to ±0.3° calibrated by a constant intersection angle method.
