MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283211600 · doi:10.1155/2022/1293548

[Retracted] Dense Convolutional Neural Network for Detection of Cancer from CT Images

2022· article· en· W4283211600 on OpenAlexaff
S. V. N. Sreenivasu, S. Gomathi, M. Jogendra Kumar, Lavanya Prathap, Abhishek Madduri, Khalid M. Almutairi, Wadi B. Alonazi, D. Kali, S. Arockia Jayadhas

Post-publication record

NatureRetraction
ReasonCompromised Peer Review;Investigation by Journal/Publisher;Investigation by Third Party;Paper Mill;Unreliable Results and/or Conclusions;
Date12/29/2023 0:00
Flagged by OpenAlex?Yes

Source: Retraction Watch, joined by DOI. OpenAlex records retraction as is_retracted, a boolean over a state space with at least four values, so it cannot express an expression of concern, a correction or a reinstatement; it reports them as false, which reads as “fine”.

Bibliographic record

VenueBioMed Research International · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersSaint Joseph UniversityKing Saud UniversitySaveetha Dental College
KeywordsConvolutional neural networkCancerComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)MedicineRadiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we develop a detection module with strong training testing to develop a dense convolutional neural network model. The model is designed in such a way that it is trained with necessary features for optimal modelling of the cancer detection. The method involves preprocessing of computerized tomography (CT) images for optimal classification at the testing stages. A 10-fold cross-validation is conducted to test the reliability of the model for cancer detection. The experimental validation is conducted in python to validate the effectiveness of the model. The result shows that the model offers robust detection of cancer instances that novel approaches on large image datasets. The simulation result shows that the proposed method provides analyzes with 94% accuracy than other methods. Also, it helps to reduce the detection errors while classifying the cancer instances than other methods the several existing methods.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.999
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.368 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations18
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioMed Research InternationalSame topicRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical ImagingFrench-language works237,207