MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993566723 · doi:10.1109/cimi.2011.5952041

Brain MRI classification using an ensemble system and LH and HL wavelet sub-bands features

2011· article· en· W1993566723 on OpenAlexaff
Salim Lahmiri, Mounir Boukadoum

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicBrain Tumor Detection and Classification
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceSupport vector machineLearning vector quantizationComputer scienceFeature extractionContextual image classificationClassifier (UML)Wavelet transformWaveletk-nearest neighbors algorithmDiscrete wavelet transformArtificial neural networkImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new classification system for brain images obtained by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is presented. A three-stage approach is used for its design. It consists of second-level discrete wavelet transform decomposition of the image under study, feature extraction from the LH and HL sub-bands using first order statistics, and subsequent classification with the k-nearest neighbor (k-NN), learning vector quantization (LVQ), and probabilistic neural networks (PNN) algorithms. Then, an ensemble classifier system is developed where the previous machines form the base classifiers and support vector machines (SVM) are employed to aggregate decisions. The proposed approach was tested on a bank of normal and pathological MRIs and the obtained results show a higher performance overall than when using features extracted from the LL sub-band, as usually done, leading to the conclusion that the horizontal and vertical sub-bands of the wavelet transform can effectively and efficiently encode the discriminating features of normal and pathological images. The experimental results also show that using an ensemble classifier improves the correct classification rates.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.094
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.180 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBrain Tumor Detection and ClassificationFrench-language works237,207