Classifications of Multispectral Colorectal Cancer Tissues Using Convolution Neural Network
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer among men and women. Its diagnosis in early stages, typically done through the analysis of colon biopsy images, can greatly improve the chances of a successful treatment. This paper proposes to use convolution neural networks (CNNs) to predict three tissue types related to the progression of CRC: benign hyperplasia (BH), intraepithelial neoplasia (IN), and carcinoma (Ca). METHODS: Multispectral biopsy images of thirty CRC patients were retrospectively analyzed. Images of tissue samples were divided into three groups, based on their type (10 BH, 10 IN, and 10 Ca). An active contour model was used to segment image regions containing pathological tissues. Tissue samples were classified using a CNN containing convolution, max-pooling, and fully-connected layers. Available tissue samples were split into a training set, for learning the CNN parameters, and test set, for evaluating its performance. RESULTS: An accuracy of 99.17% was obtained from segmented image regions, outperforming existing approaches based on traditional feature extraction, and classification techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of CNN for the classification of CRC tissue types, in particular when using presegmented regions of interest.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it