Background and Purpose: Only 1–2% of the internal carotid artery asymptomatic plaques are unstable as a result of >80% stenosis. Thus, unnecessary efforts can be saved if these plaques can be characterized and classified into symptomatic and asymptomatic using non-invasive B-mode ultrasound. Earlier plaque tissue characterization (PTC) methods were machine learning (ML)-based, which used hand-crafted features that yielded lower accuracy and unreliability. The proposed study shows the role of transfer learning (TL)-based deep learning models for PTC. Methods: As pertained weights were used in the supercomputer framework, we hypothesize that transfer learning (TL) provides improved performance compared with deep learning. We applied 11 kinds of artificial intelligence (AI) models, 10 of them were augmented and optimized using TL approaches—a class of Atheromatic™ 2.0 TL (AtheroPoint™, Roseville, CA, USA) that consisted of (i–ii) Visual Geometric Group-16, 19 (VGG16, 19); (iii) Inception V3 (IV3); (iv–v) DenseNet121, 169; (vi) XceptionNet; (vii) ResNet50; (viii) MobileNet; (ix) AlexNet; (x) SqueezeNet; and one DL-based (xi) SuriNet-derived from UNet. We benchmark 11 AI models against our earlier deep convolutional neural network (DCNN) model. Results: The best performing TL was MobileNet, with accuracy and area-under-the-curve (AUC) pairs of 96.10 ± 3% and 0.961 (p < 0.0001), respectively. In DL, DCNN was comparable to SuriNet, with an accuracy of 95.66% and 92.7 ± 5.66%, and an AUC of 0.956 (p < 0.0001) and 0.927 (p < 0.0001), respectively. We validated the performance of the AI architectures with established biomarkers such as greyscale median (GSM), fractal dimension (FD), higher-order spectra (HOS), and visual heatmaps. We benchmarked against previously developed Atheromatic™ 1.0 ML and showed an improvement of 12.9%. Conclusions: TL is a powerful AI tool for PTC into symptomatic and asymptomatic plaques.

No abstract

Automated tube potential selection software resulted in significantly improved objective image quality versus standard BMI-based methods of tube potential selection, without increased radiation doses.

Background and Motivation: Diagnosis of Parkinson’s disease (PD) is often based on medical attention and clinical signs. It is subjective and does not have a good prognosis. Artificial Intelligence (AI) has played a promising role in the diagnosis of PD. However, it introduces bias due to lack of sample size, poor validation, clinical evaluation, and lack of big data configuration. The purpose of this study is to compute the risk of bias (RoB) automatically. Method: The PRISMA search strategy was adopted to select the best 39 AI studies out of 85 PD studies closely associated with early diagnosis PD. The studies were used to compute 30 AI attributes (based on 6 AI clusters), using AP(ai)Bias 1.0 (AtheroPointTM, Roseville, CA, USA), and the mean aggregate score was computed. The studies were ranked and two cutoffs (Moderate-Low (ML) and High-Moderate (MH)) were determined to segregate the studies into three bins: low-, moderate-, and high-bias. Result: The ML and HM cutoffs were 3.50 and 2.33, respectively, which constituted 7, 13, and 6 for low-, moderate-, and high-bias studies. The best and worst architectures were “deep learning with sketches as outcomes” and “machine learning with Electroencephalography,” respectively. We recommend (i) the usage of power analysis in big data framework, (ii) that it must undergo scientific validation using unseen AI models, and (iii) that it should be taken towards clinical evaluation for reliability and stability tests. Conclusion: The AI is a vital component for the diagnosis of early PD and the recommendations must be followed to lower the RoB.