MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3109770947 · doi:10.18280/ria.340506

Lightweight Deep Learning for Malaria Parasite Detection Using Cell-Image of Blood Smear Images

2020· article· en· W3109770947 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Amin Alqudah, Ali Mohammad Alqudah, Shoroq Qazan

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue d intelligence artificielle · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDigital Imaging for Blood Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMalariaBlood smearTransfer of learningParasite hostingArtificial intelligenceDeep learningInfectious disease (medical specialty)Computer scienceAnophelesPopulationMalarial parasitesPattern recognition (psychology)DiseaseMachine learningImmunologyBiologyPlasmodium falciparumMedicinePathologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Malaria is an infectious disease that is caused by the plasmodium parasite which is a single-celled group. This disease is usually spread employing an infected female anopheles mosquito. Recent statistics show that in 2017 there were only around 219 million recorded cases and about 435,000 deaths were reported due to this disease and more than 40% of the global population is at risk. Despite this, many image processing fused with machine learning algorithms were developed by researchers for the early detection of malaria using blood smear images. This research used a new CNN model using transfer learning for classifying segmented infected and Uninfected red blood cells. The experimental results show that the proposed architecture success to detect malaria with an accuracy of 98.85%, sensitivity of 98.79%, and a specificity of 98.90% with the highest speed and smallest input size among all previously used CNN models.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations38
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue d intelligence artificielleSame topicDigital Imaging for Blood DiseasesFrench-language works237,207