Glioma Tumors’ Classification Using Deep-Neural-Network-Based Features with SVM Classifier
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The complexity of brain tissue requires skillful technicians and expert medical doctors to manually analyze and diagnose Glioma brain tumors using multiple Magnetic Resonance (MR) images with multiple modalities. Unfortunately, manual diagnosis suffers from its lengthy process, as well as elevated cost. With this type of cancerous disease, early detection will increase the chances of suitable medical procedures leading to either a full recovery or the prolongation of the patient's life. This has increased the efforts to automate the detection and diagnosis process without human intervention, allowing the detection of multiple types of tumors from MR images. This research paper proposes a multi-class Glioma tumor classification technique using the proposed deep-learning-based features with the Support Vector Machine (SVM) classifier. A deep convolution neural network is used to extract features of the MR images, which are then fed to an SVM classifier. With the proposed technique, a 96.19% accuracy was achieved for the HGG Glioma type while considering the FLAIR modality and a 95.46% for the LGG Glioma tumor type while considering the T2 modality for the classification of four Glioma classes (Edema, Necrosis, Enhancing, and Non-enhancing). The accuracies achieved using the proposed method were higher than those reported by similar methods in the extant literature using the same BraTS dataset. In addition, the accuracy results obtained in this work are better than those achieved by the GoogleNet and LeNet pre-trained models on the same 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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".