MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2998144608 · doi:10.1002/ima.22391

Bayesian inference framework for bounded generalized Gaussian‐based mixture model and its application to biomedical images classification

2019· article· en· W2998144608 on OpenAlex
Roobaea Alroobaea, Saeed Rubaiee, Sami Bourouis, Nizar Bouguila, Abdulmajeed Alsufyani

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Imaging Systems and Technology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFrequentist inferenceComputer scienceMixture modelMachine learningArtificial intelligenceInferenceBounded functionBayesian inferenceBayesian probabilityModel selectionData miningPattern recognition (psychology)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Biomedical image classification problem has attracted a lot of attention in medical engineering community and medicine applications. Accurate and automatic classification (eg, normal/abnormal or malignant/benign) has a variety of applications such as automatic decision making and is known to be very challenging. In this research, we address this problem by investigating the effectiveness of Bayesian inference methods for statistical bounded mixture models. Indeed, a novel approach termed as Bayesian learning for bounded generalized Gaussian mixture models is developed. The consideration of bounded mixture models is encouraged by their capability to take into account the nature of the data that is compactly supported. Furthermore, the consideration of Bayesian inference is more attractive compared to frequentist reasoning. In this work, we address main issues related to accurate data classification such as the effective estimation of the model's parameters and the selection of the optimal model complexity. Moreover, the problem of over‐ or under‐fitting is treated by taking into account the uncertainty through introducing prior information about the model's parameters. A comparative study between different Gaussian‐based models is also performed to evaluate the performance of the proposed framework. Experiments have been conducted on challenging biomedical image datasets that involve retinal images for diabetic retinopathy detection and mammograms for breast cancer detection. Obtained results are encouraging and show the benefits of our Bayesian framework.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.909
Threshold uncertainty score0.426

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.395 · 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