Prostate Cancer Spectral Multifeature Analysis Using TRUS Images
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper focuses on extracting and analyzing different spectral features from transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) images for prostate cancer recognition. First, the information about the images' frequency domain features and spatial domain features are combined using a Gabor filter and then integrated with the expert radiologist's information to identify the highly suspicious regions of interest (ROIs). The next stage of the proposed algorithm is to scan each identified region in order to generate the corresponding 1-D signal that represents each region. For each ROI, possible spectral feature sets are constructed using different new geometrical features extracted from the power spectrum density (PSD) of each region's signal. Next, a classifier-based algorithm for feature selection using particle swarm optimization (PSO) is adopted and used to select the optimal feature subset from the constructed feature sets. A new spectral feature set for the TRUS images using estimation of signal parameters via rotational invariance technique (ESPRIT) is also constructed, and its ability to represent tissue texture is compared to the PSD-based spectral feature sets using the support vector machines (SVMs) classifier. The accuracy obtained ranges from 72.2% to 94.4%, with the best accuracy achieved by the ESPRIT feature set.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".