MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Classifying Pneumonia among Chest X-Rays Using Transfer Learning

2020· article· en· W3082076807 on OpenAlexaff
Abdullah Irfan, Akash L. Adivishnu, Antonio Sze-To, Taher Dehkharghanian, Shahryar Rahnamayan, Hamid R. Tizhoosh

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 diagnosis using AI
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransfer of learningDeep learningComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePneumoniaMachine learningSoftware deploymentMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chest radiography has become the modality of choice for diagnosing pneumonia. However, analyzing chest X-ray images may be tedious, time-consuming and requiring expert knowledge that might not be available in less-developed regions. therefore, computer-aided diagnosis systems are needed. Recently, many classification systems based on deep learning have been proposed. Despite their success, the high development cost for deep networks is still a hurdle for deployment. Deep transfer learning (or simply transfer learning) has the merit of reducing the development cost by borrowing architectures from trained models followed by slight fine-tuning of some layers. Nevertheless, whether deep transfer learning is effective over training from scratch in the medical setting remains a research question for many applications. In this work, we investigate the use of deep transfer learning to classify pneumonia among chest X-ray images. Experimental results demonstrated that, with slight fine-tuning, deep transfer learning brings performance advantage over training from scratch. Three models, ResNet-50, Inception V3 and DensetNet121, were trained separately through transfer learning and from scratch. The former can achieve a 4.1% to 52.5% larger area under the curve (AUC) than those obtained by the latter, suggesting the effectiveness of deep transfer learning for classifying pneumonia in chest X-ray images.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.468
Threshold uncertainty score0.783

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations30
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCOVID-19 diagnosis using AIFrench-language works237,207