Deep Multi-View Breast Cancer Detection: A Multi-View Concatenated Infrared Thermal Images Based Breast Cancer Detection System Using Deep Transfer Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper simply presents a fully automated breast cancer detection system as “Deep Multi-view Breast cancer Detection” based on deep transfer learning. The deep transfer learning model i.e., Visual Geometry Group 16 (VGG 16) is used in this approach for the correct classification of Breast thermal images into either normal or abnormal. This VGG 16 model is trained with the help of Static as well as Dynamic breast thermal images dataset consisting of multi-view, single view breast thermal images. These Multi-view breast thermal images are generated in this approach by concatenating the conventional left, frontal and right view breast thermal images taken from the Database for Mastology Research with Infrared image for the first time in order to generate a more informative and complete thermal temperature map of breast for enhancing the accuracy of the overall system. For the sake of genuine comparison, three other popular deep transfer learning models like Residual Network 50 (ResNet50V2), InceptionV3 network and Visual Geometry Group 19 (VGG 19) are also trained with the same augmented dataset consisting of multi-view as well as single view breast thermal images. The VGG 16 based Deep Multi-view Breast cancer Detect system delivers the best training, validation as well as testing accuracies as compared to their other deep transfer learning models. The VGG 16 achieves an encouraging testing accuracy of 99% on the Dynamic breast thermal images testing dataset utilizing the multi-view breast thermal images as input. Whereas the testing accuracies of 95%, 94% and 89% are achieved by the VGG 19, ResNet50V2, InceptionV3 models respectively over the Dynamic breast thermal images testing dataset utilizing the same multi-view breast thermal images as input.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".