MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135030452 · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/50/15/n02

Prostate cancer multi-feature analysis using trans-rectal ultrasound images

2005· article· en· W2135030452 on OpenAlexaff
Samar Mohamed, M.M.A. Salama, Mohamed S. Kamel, Ehab F. El‐Saadany, Kamilia Rizkalla, Joseph L. Chin

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics in Medicine and Biology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSpectroscopy and Chemometric Analyses
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceFeature (linguistics)Support vector machineComputer scienceMutual informationPixelFeature selectionSegmentationMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This note focuses on extracting and analysing prostate texture features from trans-rectal ultrasound (TRUS) images for tissue characterization. One of the principal contributions of this investigation is the use of the information of the images' frequency domain features and spatial domain features to attain a more accurate diagnosis. Each image is divided into regions of interest (ROIs) by the Gabor multi-resolution analysis, a crucial stage, in which segmentation is achieved according to the frequency response of the image pixels. The pixels with a similar response to the same filter are grouped to form one ROI. Next, from each ROI two different statistical feature sets are constructed; the first set includes four grey level dependence matrix (GLDM) features and the second set consists of five grey level difference vector (GLDV) features. These constructed feature sets are then ranked by the mutual information feature selection (MIFS) algorithm. Here, the features that provide the maximum mutual information of each feature and class (cancerous and non-cancerous) and the minimum mutual information of the selected features are chosen, yielding a reduced feature subset. The two constructed feature sets, GLDM and GLDV, as well as the reduced feature subset, are examined in terms of three different classifiers: the condensed k-nearest neighbour (CNN), the decision tree (DT) and the support vector machine (SVM). The accuracy classification results range from 87.5% to 93.75%, where the performance of the SVM and that of the DT are significantly better than the performance of the CNN.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.147
Threshold uncertainty score0.470

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations37
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics in Medicine and BiologySame topicSpectroscopy and Chemometric AnalysesFrench-language works237,207