MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2042489876 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2012.6334830

An empirical mode decomposition approach for automatic diagnosis of retina digital images

2012· article· en· W2042489876 on OpenAlexaff
Salim Lahmiri, Christian Gargour, M. Gabrea

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHilbert–Huang transformStandard deviationArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Discrete wavelet transformComputer scienceWaveletSupport vector machineEntropy (arrow of time)HistogramComputer visionDigital imageWavelet transformMathematicsImage processingStatisticsImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study six statistical textural features are extracted from retina digital images processed with the empirical mode decomposition (EMD). They are the mean, standard deviation, smoothness, third moment, uniformity, and entropy. The purpose is to classify normal and abnormal images. Five different pathologies are considered. They are artery sheath, blot hemorrhage, circinates, age-related macular drusens, and microaneurysms. Support vector machines are employed as classifier. Ten random folds are generated to perform cross-validation tests. The average and standard deviation of the correct recognition rate, sensitivity and specificity are computed for each simulation to assess the performance of the classifier. The obtained results generally outperform those given by using the discrete wavelet transform (DWT) instead of the EMD.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.379 · 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

Citations3
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRetinal Imaging and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207