Roman Stoklasa

Dr. Roman Stoklasa

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

15Years (2012-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
11 January 2022 in IEEE Access
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
BTBernardo Camajori Tedeschini
Bernardo Camajori Tedeschini
Stefano SavazziStefano Savazzi
Stefano Savazzi
RSRoman Stoklasa
Roman Stoklasa
LBLuca Barbieri
Luca Barbieri
ISIoannis Stathopoulos
Ioannis Stathopoulos
LSLuigi Serio
Luigi Serio
Smart healthcare relies on artificial intelligence (AI) functions for learning and analysis of patient data. Since large and diverse datasets for training of Machine Learning (ML) models can rarely be found in individual medical centers, classical centralized AI requires moving privacy-sensitive data from medical institutions to data centers that process the fused information. Training on data centers thus requires higher communication resource/energy demands while violating privacy. This is considered today as a significant bottleneck in pursuing scientific collaboration across trans-national clinical medical research centers. Recently, federated learning (FL) has emerged as a distributed AI approach that enables the cooperative training of ML models, without the need of sharing patient data. This paper dives into the analysis of different FL methods and proposes a real-time distributed networking framework based on the Message Queuing Telemetry Transport (MQTT) protocol. In particular, we design a number of solutions for ML over networks, based on FL tools relying on a parameter server (PS) and fully decentralized paradigms driven by consensus methods. The proposed approach is validated in the context of brain tumor segmentation, using a modified version of the popular U-NET model with representative clinical datasets obtained from the daily clinical workflow. The FL process is implemented on multiple physically separated machines located in different countries and communicating over the Internet. The real-time test-bed is used to obtain measurements of training accuracy vs. latency trade-offs, and to highlight key operational conditions that affect the performance in real deployments.

29 May 2012 in Journal of Cellular Biochemistry
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
DODarya Yu. Orlova
Darya Yu. Orlova
LSLenka Stixova
Lenka Stixova
SKStanislav Kozubek
Stanislav Kozubek
HGHinco J. Gierman
Hinco J. Gierman
GŠGabriela Šustáčková
Gabriela Šustáčková
Eva BartovaEva Bartova
Eva Bartova

28 January 2026 in Artificial Intelligence in Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
GFGernot Fiala
Gernot Fiala
MPMarkus Plass
Markus Plass
RHRobert Harb
Robert Harb
PRPeter Regitnig
Peter Regitnig
Kristijan SkokKristijan Skok
Kristijan Skok
PHPetr Holub
Petr Holub
A Whole Slide Image (WSI) is a high-resolution digital image created by scanning an entire glass slide containing a biological specimen, such as tissue sections or cell samples, at multiple magnifications. These images are digitally viewable, analyzable, and shareable, and are widely used for Artificial Intelligence (AI) algorithm development. WSIs play an important role in pathology for disease diagnosis and oncology for cancer research, but are also applied in neurology, veterinary medicine, hematology, microbiology, dermatology, pharmacology, toxicology, immunology, and forensic science. When assembling cohorts for AI training or validation, it is essential to know the content of a WSI. However, no standard currently exists for this metadata, and such a selection has largely relied on manual inspection, which is not suitable for large collections with millions of objects. We propose a general framework to generate 2D index maps (tissue maps) that describe the morphological content of WSIs using common syntax and semantics to achieve interoperability between catalogs. The tissue maps are structured in three layers: source, tissue type, and pathological alterations. Each layer assigns WSI segments to specific classes, providing AI-ready metadata. We demonstrate the advantages of this standard by applying AI-based metadata extraction from WSIs to generate tissue maps and integrating them into a WSI archive. This integration enhances search capabilities within WSI archives, thereby facilitating the accelerated assembly of high-quality, balanced, and more targeted datasets for AI training, validation, and cancer research.

31 December 2024 in Journal of Imaging
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
ISIoannis Stathopoulos
Ioannis Stathopoulos
RSRoman Stoklasa
Roman Stoklasa
Maria Anthi KouriMaria Anthi Kouri
Maria Anthi Kouri
GVGeorgios Velonakis
Georgios Velonakis
EKEfstratios Karavasilis
Efstratios Karavasilis
LSLuigi Serio
Luigi Serio
Detection and segmentation of brain abnormalities using Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) is an important task that, nowadays, the role of AI algorithms as supporting tools is well established both at the research and clinical-production level. While the performance of the state-of-the-art models is increasing, reaching radiologists and other experts’ accuracy levels in many cases, there is still a lot of research needed on the direction of in-depth and transparent evaluation of the correct results and failures, especially in relation to important aspects of the radiological practice: abnormality position, intensity level, and volume. In this work, we focus on the analysis of the segmentation results of a pre-trained U-net model trained and validated on brain MRI examinations containing four different pathologies: Tumors, Strokes, Multiple Sclerosis (MS), and White Matter Hyperintensities (WMH). We present the segmentation results for both the whole abnormal volume and for each abnormal component inside the examinations of the validation set. In the first case, a dice score coefficient (DSC), sensitivity, and precision of 0.76, 0.78, and 0.82, respectively, were found, while in the second case the model detected and segmented correct (True positives) the 48.8% (DSC ≥ 0.5) of abnormal components, partially correct the 27.1% (0.05 > DSC > 0.5), and missed (False Negatives) the 24.1%, while it produced 25.1% False Positives. Finally, we present an extended analysis between the True positives, False Negatives, and False positives versus their position inside the brain, their intensity at three MRI modalities (FLAIR, T2, and T1ce) and their volume.