Digital Image Processing and Machine Learning Techniques for the Detection of Architectural Distortion in Prior Mammograms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Architectural distortion is a subtle but important early sign of breast cancer. The purpose of this study is to develop methods for the detection of sites of architectural distortion in prior mammograms of interval-cancer cases. Screening mammograms obtained prior to the detection of cancer could contain subtle signs of early stages of breast cancer, in particular architectural distortion. The methods for the detection of architectural distortion are based upon Gabor filters, phase portrait analysis, a novel method for the analysis of the angular spread of power, fractal analysis via Fractal Dimension (FD), structural analysis of texture via Laws’ texture energy measures derived from geometrically transformed regions of interest (ROIs), and statistical analysis of texture using Haralick’s 14 texture features. The application of Gabor filters and linear phase portrait modeling was used to detect initial candidates of sites of architectural distortion; 4,224 ROIs, including 301 true-positive ROIs related to architectural distortion, were automatically obtained from 106 prior mammograms of 56 interval-cancer cases and from 52 mammograms of 13 normal cases. For each ROI, the FD, three measures of angular spread of power, 10 Laws’ measures, and 14 Haralick’s features were computed. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves obtained using the features selected by stepwise logistic regression and the leave-one-ROI-out method are 0.76 with the Bayesian classifier, 0.75 with Fisher linear discriminate analysis, and 0.78 with a single-layer feed forward neural network. Free-response receiver operating characteristics indicated sensitivities of 0.80 and 0.90 at 5.8 and 8.1 false positives per image, respectively, with the Bayesian classifier and the leave-one-image-out method. The methods have shown good potential in detecting architectural distortion in mammograms of interval-cancer cases.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".