Capsule Networks for Brain Tumor Classification Based on MRI Images and Coarse Tumor Boundaries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
According to official statistics, cancer is considered as the second leading cause of human fatalities. Among different types of cancer, brain tumor is seen as one of the deadliest forms due to its aggressive nature, heterogeneous characteristics, and low relative survival rate. Determining the type of brain tumor has significant impact on the treatment choice and patient's survival. Human-centered diagnosis is typically error-prone and unreliable resulting in a recent surge of interest to automatize this process using convolutional neural networks (CNNs). CNNs, however, fail to fully utilize spatial relations, which is particularly harmful for tumor classification, as the relation between the tumor and its surrounding tissue is a critical indicator of the tumor's type. In our recent work, we have incorporated newly developed CapsNets to overcome this shortcoming. CapsNets are, however, highly sensitive to the miscellaneous image background. The paper addresses this gap. The main contribution is to equip CapsNet with access to the tumor surrounding tissues, without distracting it from the main target. A modified CapsNet architecture is, therefore, proposed for brain tumor classification, which takes the tumor coarse boundaries as extra inputs within its pipeline to increase the CapsNet's focus. The proposed approach noticeably outperforms its counterparts.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".