MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Skin Cancer Detection using Deep Learning

2022· article· en· W4226316964 on OpenAlexaff
Raman Kumar, Amarjeet Singh, Sparsha Srinath, Nimal Kurien Thomas, Vishal Arasu

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 International Conference on Electronics and Renewable Systems (ICEARS) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management
Canadian institutionsHorizon College and Seminary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceDeep learningCancer detectionArtificial intelligenceCancerMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Identifying melanoma at the early stages of diagnosis is imperative as early detection can exponentially increase one’s chances of cure. The paper first proposes a literature survey of multiple methods used for performing skin cancer classification. Our methodology consists of using Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) to identify and diagnose the skin cancer using the IS IC dataset containing 2637 images. The proposed model gives an accuracy of 88% for classifying the training dataset as either benign or malignant.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.486
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations15
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 International Conference on Electronics and Renewable Systems (ICEARS)Same topicCutaneous Melanoma Detection and ManagementFrench-language works237,207