MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2112257301 · doi:10.5566/ias.v20.p169-174

WAVELET-BASED MULTIFRACTAL FORMALISM TO ASSIST IN DIAGNOSIS IN DIGITIZED MAMMOGRAMS

2011· article· en· W2112257301 on OpenAlexaff
Pierre Kestener, Jean Marc Lina, Philippe Saint-Jean, A. Arnéodo

Bibliographic record

VenueImage Analysis & Stereology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalOccupational Cancer Research Centre
FundersInstitut Bergonié
KeywordsMultifractal systemHurst exponentScalingWaveletWavelet transformExponentGravitational singularityMathematicsStatistical physicsArtificial intelligenceFractalComputer scienceMathematical analysisPhysicsStatisticsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We apply the 2D wavelet transform (WTMM) method to perform a multifractal analysis of digitized mammograms. We show that normal regions display monofractal scaling properties as characterized by the socalled Hurst exponent H =0.3±0.1 in fatty areas which look like antipersistent self-similar random surfaces, while H=0.65±0.1 in dense areas which exibit long-range correlations and possibly multifractal scaling properties. We further demonstrate that the 2D WTMM method provides a very efficient way to detect tumors as well as microcalcifications (MC) which correspond to much stronger singularities than those involved in the background tissue roughness fluctuations. These preliminary results indicate that the texture discriminatory power of the 2D WTMM method may lead to significant improvement in computer-assisted diagnosis in digitized mammograms.

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)0.000
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.239 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations94
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueImage Analysis & StereologySame topicAI in cancer detectionFrench-language works237,207