A Hybrid Methodology for Automation the Diagnosis of Leukemia Based on Quantitative and Morphological Feature Analysis
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
Recent year’s witnessed a huge revolution for developing an automated diagnosis for different disease such as cancer using medical image processing. Many researches have been dedicated to achieve this goal. Analyzing medical microscopic histology images provide us with large information about the status of patient and the progress of diseases, help to determine if the tissue have any pathological changes. Automation of the diagnosis of these images will lead to better, faster and enhanced diagnosis for different hematological and histological tissue images such as cancer. This paper propose an automated methodology for analyzing cancer histology and hematology microscopic images to detect leukemia using image processing by combining two diagnosis procedures initial and advance; the initial diagnosis depend on the percentage of the white blood cells in microscopic images affected by leukemia as indicator for the existence of leukemia in the blood smear sample. Whereas, the advance diagnosis classifying the leukemia according into different types using feature bag classifier. The experimental results showed that the proposed methodology initial diagnosis is able to detect leukemia images and differentiate it from samples that do not have leukemia. While, advance diagnosis it is able to detect and classify most leukemia types and differentiate between acute and chronic, but in some cases in the chronic leukemia where the percent of blast cells and shape are similar; it gave a diagnosis of the type of leukemia to the most similar type.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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