A New Early Stage Diabetic Retinopathy Diagnosis Model Using Deep Convolutional Neural Networks and Principal Component Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is a disease of the retina, which leads over time to vision problems such retinal detachment, vitreous hemorrhage, glaucoma, and in worse cases leads to blindness, which can initially be controlled by periodic DR-screening. Early diagnosis will lead to greater control of the disease, whereas performing retinal examinations on all diabetic patients is an unattainable need, as diabetes is a chronic disease and its global prevalence has been steadily increasing over the past few decades. According to recent World Health Organization statistics, about 422 million people worldwide have diabetes, the majority living in low-and middle-income countries. This paper proposes a new strategy that brings the strength of convolutional neural networks (CNNs) to the diagnosis of DR. Coupled with using principal component analysis (PCA) that performs dimension reduction to improve the diagnostic accuracy, the proposed model exploiting edge-preserving guided image filtering (E-GIF) that performs as a contrast enhancement mechanism, and in addition to smoothing low gradient areas, it also accentuates strong edges. Diabetic retinopathy causes progressive damage to the blood vessels in the retina to the extent that it leaves traces and lesions in the tissues of the retina. These lesions appear in the form of edges and when processing retinal images, we seek to accentuate these edges to enable better diagnosis of diabetic retinopathy symptoms. A new CNN architecture with residual connections is used, which performs very well in diagnosing DR. The proposed model is named with RUnet-PCA: Residual U-net Deep CNN with Principal Component Analysis. The well-known AlexNet, VggNet-s, VggNet-16, VggNet-19, GoogleNet, and ResNet models were adopted for comparison with the proposed model. Publicly available Kaggle dataset was employed for training exploring the DR diagnosis accuracy. Experimental results show that the proposed RUnet-PCA model achieved a diagnosis accuracy of 98.44% and it was extremely robust and promising in comparison to other diagnosis methods.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".