MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3209533960 · doi:10.1002/ima.22666

Whole slide cervical image classification based on convolutional neural network and random forest

2021· article· en· W3209533960 on OpenAlexaff
Limei Su, Shenjiao Huang, Zhiqin Zhang, Huajiang Wei, Tongsheng Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Imaging Systems and Technology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Aging
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsRandom forestConvolutional neural networkComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Feature extractionPrincipal component analysisFeature (linguistics)Classifier (UML)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Cervical cancer is a kind of common female malignancy ranking fourth for mortality worldwide. Traditional histopathological examination, an important diagnosis method of cervical cancer, is still manually performed by pathologists under the microscope, which is labor intensive and error‐prone. In this article, deep learning is used for whole slide cervical image (WSCI) analysis to explore an automatic and effective method for the diagnosis of cervical cancer. We combine convolutional neural network (CNN) and random forest (RF) classifier for whole slide cervical image classification. A new multilevel feature fusion strategy namedEnsembleis used for features extraction from the features extracted by CNN.Ensemblethat fuses features extracted by convolution layers with different depths in CNN together is capable of capturing fusional features which can describe patches at different levels from different convolutional layers. Principal component analysis (PCA) algorithm is introduced for feature reduction of the multilevel features. Our experiments are carried out on WSCI dataset which consists of a total of 163 WSCIs from 27 patients. We combineCNN + PCA + RFmodel andCNN + RFmodel, respectively, with four feature extraction strategies to conduct eight comparative experiments on the 163 WSCIs. Experimental results demonstrate that when using multilevel feature fusion strategy, the classification accuracy of theCNN + PCA + RFmodel reaches the highest to 99.39%. In addition, theCNN + PCA + RFmodel conducting the multilevel feature fusion strategy performs better than that conducting single‐level feature extraction strategies.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Imaging Systems and TechnologySame topicAI in cancer detectionFrench-language works237,207