Domain adaptation has become a prominent problem setting in machine learning and related fields. This review asks the question: how can a classifier learn from a source domain and generalize to a target domain? We present a categorization of approaches, divided into, what we refer to as, sample-based, feature-based and inference-based methods. Sample-based methods focus on weighting individual observations during training based on their importance to the target domain. Feature-based methods revolve around on mapping, projecting and representing features such that a source classifier performs well on the target domain and inference-based methods incorporate adaptation into the parameter estimation procedure, for instance through constraints on the optimization procedure. Additionally, we review a number of conditions that allow for formulating bounds on the cross-domain generalization error. Our categorization highlights recurring ideas and raises questions important to further research.

Background: The most tedious and time-consuming task in medical additive manufacturing (AM) is image segmentation. The aim of the present study was to develop and train a convolutional neural network (CNN) for bone segmentation in computed tomography (CT) scans. Method: The CNN was trained with CT scans acquired using six different scanners. Standard tessellation language (STL) models of 20 patients who had previously undergone craniotomy and cranioplasty using additively manufactured skull implants served as "gold standard" models during CNN training. The CNN segmented all patient CT scans using a leave-2-out scheme. All segmented CT scans were converted into STL models and geometrically compared with the gold standard STL models. Results: The CT scans segmented using the CNN demonstrated a large overlap with the gold standard segmentation and resulted in a mean Dice similarity coefficient of 0.92 ± 0.04. The CNN-based STL models demonstrated mean surface deviations ranging between −0.19 mm ± 0.86 mm and 1.22 mm ± 1.75 mm, when compared to the gold standard STL models. No major differences were observed between the mean deviations of the CNN-based STL models acquired using six different CT scanners. Conclusions: The fully-automated CNN was able to accurately segment the skull. CNNs thus offer the opportunity of removing the current prohibitive barriers of time and effort during CT image segmentation, making patientspecific AM constructs more accesible.

In a broad range of fields it may be desirable to reuse a supervised classification algorithm and apply it to a new data set. However, generalization of such an algorithm and thus achieving a similar classification performance is only possible when the training data used to build the algorithm is similar to new unseen data one wishes to apply it to. It is often unknown in advance how an algorithm will perform on new unseen data, being a crucial reason for not deploying an algorithm at all. Therefore, tools are needed to measure the similarity of data sets. In this paper, we propose the Data Representativeness Criterion (DRC) to determine how representative a training data set is of a new unseen data set. We present a proof of principle, to see whether the DRC can quantify the similarity of data sets and whether the DRC relates to the performance of a supervised classification algorithm. We compared a number of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data sets, ranging from subtle to severe difference is acquisition parameters. Results indicate that, based on the similarity of data sets, the DRC is able to give an indication as to when the performance of a supervised classifier decreases. The strictness of the DRC can be set by the user, depending on what one considers to be an acceptable underperformance.

No abstract