Detection of architectural distortion in mammograms acquired prior to the detection of breast cancer using texture and fractal analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mammography is a widely used screening tool for the early detection of breast cancer. One of the commonly missed signs of breast cancer is architectural distortion. The purpose of this study is to explore the application of fractal analysis and texture measures for the detection of architectural distortion in screening mammograms taken prior to the detection of breast cancer. A method based on Gabor filters and phase portrait analysis was used to detect initial candidates of sites of architectural distortion. A total of 386 regions of interest (ROIs) were automatically obtained from 14 "prior mammograms", including 21 ROIs related to architectural distortion. The fractal dimension of the ROIs was calculated using the circular average power spectrum technique. The average fractal dimension of the normal (false-positive) ROIs was higher than that of the ROIs with architectural distortion. For the "prior mammograms", the best receiver operating characteristics (ROC) performance achieved was 0.74 with the fractal dimension and 0.70 with fourteen texture features, in terms of the area under the ROC curve.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".