MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2791250578 · doi:10.1117/12.2293353

Computer-aided detection of basal cell carcinoma through blood content analysis in dermoscopy images

2018· article· en· W2791250578 on OpenAlexaff
Pegah Kharazmi, Sunil Kalia, Harvey Lui, Z. Jane Wang, Tim K. Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Imaging 2018: Computer-Aided Diagnosis · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBiometric Identification and Security
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer AgencyUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBasal cell carcinomaSkin cancerLesionPathologyComputer-aided diagnosisMedicineCancerBasal cellComputer scienceRadiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the most common type of skin cancer, which is highly damaging to the skin at its advanced stages and causes huge costs on the healthcare system. However, most types of BCC are easily curable if detected at early stage. Due to limited access to dermatologists and expert physicians, non-invasive computer-aided diagnosis is a viable option for skin cancer screening. A clinical biomarker of cancerous tumors is increased vascularization and excess blood flow. In this paper, we present a computer-aided technique to differentiate cancerous skin tumors from benign lesions based on vascular characteristics of the lesions. Dermoscopy image of the lesion is first decomposed using independent component analysis of the RGB channels to derive melanin and hemoglobin maps. A novel set of clinically inspired features and ratiometric measurements are then extracted from each map to characterize the vascular properties and blood content of the lesion. The feature set is then fed into a random forest classifier. Over a dataset of 664 skin lesions, the proposed method achieved an area under ROC curve of 0.832 in a 10-fold cross validation for differentiating basal cell carcinomas from benign lesions.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical Imaging 2018: Computer-Aided DiagnosisSame topicBiometric Identification and SecurityFrench-language works237,207