MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229443674 · doi:10.18280/ts.390214

A New Hybrid Breast Cancer Diagnosis Model Using Deep Learning Model and ReliefF

2022· article· en· W4229443674 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kadir Can Burçak, Harun Uğuz

Bibliographic record

VenueTraitement du signal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceSupport vector machineComputer scienceMachine learningConvolutional neural networkNaive Bayes classifierDeep learningBreast cancerPattern recognition (psychology)Transfer of learningClassifier (UML)Artificial neural networkCancerMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Breast cancer is a dangerous type of cancer usually found in women and is a significant research topic in medical science. In patients who are diagnosed and not treated early, cancer spreads to other organs, making treatment difficult. In breast cancer diagnosis, the accuracy of the pathological diagnosis is of great importance to shorten the decision-making process, minimize unnoticed cancer cells and obtain a faster diagnosis. However, the similarity of images in histopathological breast cancer image analysis is a sensitive and difficult process that requires high competence for field experts. In recent years, researchers have been seeking solutions to this process using machine learning and deep learning methods, which have contributed to significant developments in medical diagnosis and image analysis. In this study, a hybrid DCNN + ReliefF is proposed for the classification of breast cancer histopathological images, utilizing the activation properties of pre-trained deep convolutional neural network (DCNN) models, and the dimension-reduction-based ReliefF feature selective algorithm. The model is based on a fine-tuned transfer-learning technique for fully connected layers. In addition, the models were compared to the k-nearest neighbor (kNN), naive Bayes (NB), and support vector machine (SVM) machine learning approaches. The performance of each feature extractor and classifier combination was analyzed using the sensitivity, precision, F1-Score, and ROC curves. The proposed hybrid model was trained separately at different magnifications using the BreakHis dataset. The results show that the model is an efficient classification model with up to 97.8% (AUC) accuracy.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.827
Threshold uncertainty score0.767

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.246
Teacher spread0.223 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTraitement du signalSame topicAI in cancer detectionFrench-language works237,207