Advanced Fuzzy Methods for Mammography Image Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Breast cancer is the second most common type of cancer worldwide and one of the most common causes of cancer deaths. Worryingly, breast cancer incidence rates have increased over recent years. Computer Aided Diagnosis (CADx) systems are designed to help radiologists identify cancerous signs earlier, and hence to reduce the death rate. These systems involve at least two main stages: feature extraction to derive useful information from the images, and diagnosis which is typically handled as a machine learning/pattern classification problem. For breast cancer diagnosis, x-ray mammography is the main modality of diagnosis. The inherent fuzziness in the nature of mammography images makes fuzzy set theory a useful technique for handling these images. It is used as a well-suited tool to extract meaningful information from inexact data and generate appropriate solutions. In this chapter, the authors present a fast overview of some fuzzy-based methods for computer-aided detection and computer aided diagnosis of breast cancer using mammography images. Their focus is on fuzzy logic-based methods developed for mammogram enhancement, microcalcification (MC) detection, and detection and classification of masses.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.006 |
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".