MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4290612991 · doi:10.3389/fonc.2022.931141

SkinNet-16: A deep learning approach to identify benign and malignant skin lesions

2022· article· en· W4290612991 on OpenAlexaff
Pronab Ghosh, Sami Azam, Ryana Quadir, Asif Karim, F. M. Javed Mehedi Shamrat, Shohag Kumar Bhowmik, Mirjam Jonkman, Khan Md. Hasib, Kawsar Ahmed

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Oncology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceDeep learningComputer sciencePreprocessorPattern recognition (psychology)SegmentationClassifier (UML)Skin cancerFeature extractionFeature selectionArtificial neural networkRegion of interestMachine learningPrincipal component analysisCancerMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Skin cancer these days have become quite a common occurrence especially in certain geographic areas such as Oceania. Early detection of such cancer with high accuracy is of utmost importance, and studies have shown that deep learning- based intelligent approaches to address this concern have been fruitful. In this research, we present a novel deep learning- based classifier that has shown promise in classifying this type of cancer on a relevant preprocessed dataset having important features pre-identified through an effective feature extraction method. Skin cancer in modern times has become one of the most ubiquitous types of cancer. Accurate identification of cancerous skin lesions is of vital importance in treating this malady. In this research, we employed a deep learning approach to identify benign and malignant skin lesions. The initial dataset was obtained from Kaggle before several preprocessing steps for hair and background removal, image enhancement, selection of the region of interest (ROI), region-based segmentation, morphological gradient, and feature extraction were performed, resulting in histopathological images data with 20 input features based on geometrical and textural features. A principle component analysis (PCA)-based feature extraction technique was put into action to reduce the dimensionality to 10 input features. Subsequently, we applied our deep learning classifier, SkinNet-16, to detect the cancerous lesion accurately at a very early stage. The highest accuracy was obtained with the Adamax optimizer with a learning rate of 0.006 from the neural network-based model developed in this study. The model also delivered an impressive accuracy of approximately 99.19%.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.805
Threshold uncertainty score0.498

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations56
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in OncologySame topicCutaneous Melanoma Detection and ManagementFrench-language works237,207