MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027617237 · doi:10.1109/newcas.2012.6329014

Fractal dimension and high order statistics of spectral energy distribution as features for pathology detection in brain MR images

2012· article· en· W2027617237 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)Fractal dimensionPrincipal component analysisArtificial intelligenceFeature extractionWaveletFractal analysisWavelet transformStandard deviationDimension (graph theory)Discrete wavelet transformFractalMathematicsComputer scienceStatisticsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new methodology to detect pathologies in human brain magnetic resonance (MR) images is investigated. It is based on edge extraction in the Hilbert domain and subsequent analysis by means of fractal dimension and spectral energy distribution high order statistics. The technique is particularly suitable for pathologies characterized by bright structures in the MR images as do Glioma and Metastatic bronchogenic carcinoma. When classifying normal versus abnormal images dues to these two pathologies, ANOVA statistics show that the suggested features have strong between-classes differences, and the obtained classification accuracy by support vector machines is 99.9%±0.006. In comparison, applying a standard feature extraction technique based on the discrete wavelet transform (DWT) and principal component analysis (PCA) yielded 85.2%±0.05 accuracy.

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: Observational · 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)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBrain Tumor Detection and ClassificationFrench-language works237,207