MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

HEp-2 Cell Classification Using an Ensemble of Convolutional Neural Networks

2021· article· en· W4200618832 on OpenAlexaff
Payam Hosseinzadeh Kasani, Sara Hosseinzadeh Kassani, Han Wool Kim, Kee Hyun Cho, Jae‐Won Jang, Cheol‐Heui Yun

Bibliographic record

Venue2021 International Conference on Information and Communication Technology Convergence (ICTC) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmunotherapy and Immune Responses
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvolutional neural networkArtificial intelligenceDiscriminative modelComputer scienceDeep learningPattern recognition (psychology)Benchmark (surveying)Contextual image classificationEnsemble learningMachine learningImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The presence of Anti-nuclear Autoantibodies (ANA) in human serum is related to autoimmune diseases. Indirect Immunofluorescence (IIF) imaging on human epithelial type-2 cells (HEp-2) is the gold standard for the ANA test. Accurate Human Epithelial-2 (HEp-2) cell classification plays an essential role in the diagnosis of immune system diseases. Developing computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) systems for ANA analysis is necessary for improving the disease diagnosis and treatment planning of the patients. Traditionally, cell patterns are assessed manually with a fluorescence microscope. However, due to the large variations of cell patterns, manual interpretation of the cell images is time-consuming, highly subjective and also requires experienced experts. In this paper, we propose a deep learning-based ensemble model of Inception V3and Xception architectures for the task of HEp-2 cell images classification as either healthy or case subjects. In intuition, the aggregation of different architectures can effectively extract and fuse the most discriminative deep features from input images. Also, we use a transfer learning strategy and hyper-parameter tuning to further improve the performance of the proposed model. Experimental results demonstrate that our proposed ensemble model achieves promising results with an accuracy of 95.07%, sensitivity of 99.96% and specificity of 99.79% in comparison with state-of-the-art models on the ICPR 2012 benchmark dataset.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.506
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.240 · 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.

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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2021 International Conference on Information and Communication Technology Convergence (ICTC)Same topicImmunotherapy and Immune ResponsesFrench-language works237,207