MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3006735766 · doi:10.1109/icmla.2019.00077

Computer-Aided Diagnosis using Class-Weighted Deep Neural Network

2019· article· en· W3006735766 on OpenAlexaff
Pritam Sarkar, Vandad Davoodnia, Ali Etemad

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceConvolutional neural networkArtificial intelligenceDeep learningMammographyArtificial neural networkBreast cancerComputer-aided diagnosisFeature selectionClass (philosophy)Feature (linguistics)Feature extractionPattern recognition (psychology)Machine learningCancerMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Computer-aided diagnosis has become a major focal point of Artificial Intelligence. Interpreting medical images is often time-consuming and requires significant human expertise. Hence, there is an increasing demand to use machine learning techniques to correctly classify different medical images captured by mammography, CT scans, and MRI among others. This paper presents a deep learning method for computer-aided differential diagnosis of benign and malignant breast cancer tumors by avoiding potential errors caused by poor feature selection as well as class imbalances in the dataset. We design, develop and test an end-to-end convolutional neural network architecture for two different breast cancer datasets of fine needle aspiration biopsy samples, and show that our network outperforms the state of the art. Furthermore, we have introduced a loss coefficient which can be adjusted to fine-tune the performance of our network. The proposed method can be used to support oncologists in the detection of breast cancer with high confidence.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.223 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAI in cancer detectionFrench-language works237,207