MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3157379563 · doi:10.18280/rces.080101

Classification of Melanoma Images Using Empirical Wavelet Transform

2021· article· en· W3157379563 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Computer Engineering Studies · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Computer scienceSkin cancerImage processingMelanomaPixelFeature extractionComputer visionCancerImage (mathematics)Medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Skin cancer is the most common cancer, accounting for 75% of all skin cancers worldwide. Malignant melanoma is the most invasive type of skin cancer, which is deadly. Some techniques have been investigated to diagnose skin diseases using skin tissue classification and diagnosis models and skin recognition approaches using colors based on image retrieval methods. In this regard, image processing techniques and classification methods are intelligent. The purpose of this method, diagnosing melanoma skin cancer using image processing. In the proposed method, after collecting the dataset, the boundary to separate the skin lesion from the background was specified. Then in the next step, the analysis was performed using Empirical wavelet transform (EWT). Then the color, texture, and shape features were extracted. In the next step, the feature was selected by Gray Wolf meta-heuristic algorithm using ranking models and the disease was classified into two categories, namely normal and abnormal. The database used in this study contains 594 dermatoscopic images with a resolution of 512 × 768 pixels, 476 images with normal spots, and 88 images with abnormal spots caused by melanoma. The evaluation results revealed that the proposed method had an accuracy of 97.25, indicating its significant performance compared to other methods. The contribution of the results of the proposed method can be very useful and valuable in the future for early detection of skin cancer.

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)0.000
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.531
Threshold uncertainty score0.333

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.286 · 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