MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132474607 · doi:10.2528/pier13110709

INVESTIGATION OF CLASSIFIERS FOR TUMOR DETECTION WITH AN EXPERIMENTAL TIME-DOMAIN BREAST SCREENING SYSTEM

2014· article· en· W2132474607 on OpenAlexafffund
Adam Santorelli, Emily Porter, Evgeny Kirshin, Yi Jun Liu, Milica Popović

Bibliographic record

VenueElectromagnetic waves · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrowave Imaging and Scattering Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les TechnologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMcGill University
KeywordsTime domainComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Computer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract—In this work we examine, for the first time, the use of classification algorithms for early-stage tumor detection with an experimental time-domain microwave breast screening system. The experimental system contains a 16-element antenna array, and testing is done on breast phantoms that mimic breast tissue dielectric properties. We obtain experimental data from multiple breast phantoms with two possible tumor locations. In this work, we investigate a method for detecting the tumors within the breast but without the usual complexity inherent to image-generation methods, and confirm its feasibility on experimental data. The proposed method uses machine learning techniques, namely Support Vector Machines (SVM) and Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA), to determine whether the current breast being scanned is tumor-free. Our results show that both SVM and LDA methods have promise as algorithms supporting early breast cancer microwave screening. 1.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.174 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations38
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectromagnetic wavesSame topicMicrowave Imaging and Scattering AnalysisFrench-language works237,207