MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4289852144 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0269826

A shallow deep learning approach to classify skin cancer using down-scaling method to minimize time and space complexity

2022· article· en· W4289852144 on OpenAlexaff
Sidratul Montaha, Sami Azam, A. K. M. Rakibul Haque Rafid, Sayma Islam, Pronab Ghosh, Mirjam Jonkman

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOverfittingComputer scienceConvolutional neural networkArtificial intelligenceDeep learningPreprocessorPattern recognition (psychology)Skin cancerRobustness (evolution)Machine learningContextual image classificationFeature engineeringArtificial neural networkImage (mathematics)CancerMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The complex feature characteristics and low contrast of cancer lesions, a high degree of inter-class resemblance between malignant and benign lesions, and the presence of various artifacts including hairs make automated melanoma recognition in dermoscopy images quite challenging. To date, various computer-aided solutions have been proposed to identify and classify skin cancer. In this paper, a deep learning model with a shallow architecture is proposed to classify the lesions into benign and malignant. To achieve effective training while limiting overfitting problems due to limited training data, image preprocessing and data augmentation processes are introduced. After this, the 'box blur' down-scaling method is employed, which adds efficiency to our study by reducing the overall training time and space complexity significantly. Our proposed shallow convolutional neural network (SCNN_12) model is trained and evaluated on the Kaggle skin cancer data ISIC archive which was augmented to 16485 images by implementing different augmentation techniques. The model was able to achieve an accuracy of 98.87% with optimizer Adam and a learning rate of 0.001. In this regard, parameter and hyper-parameters of the model are determined by performing ablation studies. To assert no occurrence of overfitting, experiments are carried out exploring k-fold cross-validation and different dataset split ratios. Furthermore, to affirm the robustness the model is evaluated on noisy data to examine the performance when the image quality gets corrupted.This research corroborates that effective training for medical image analysis, addressing training time and space complexity, is possible even with a lightweighted network using a limited amount of training data.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.881
Threshold uncertainty score0.842

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations34
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicCutaneous Melanoma Detection and ManagementFrench-language works237,207