MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Classification of Ultrasound Breast Images Using Fused Ensemble of Deep Learning Classifiers

2022· article· en· W4292874285 on OpenAlexaff
Ebrahim A. Nehary, Sreeraman Rajan

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 IEEE International Symposium on Medical Measurements and Applications (MeMeA) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceAutoencoderDeep learningTransfer of learningComputer scienceEnsemble learningMachine learningPattern recognition (psychology)Convolutional neural networkContextual image classificationSource codeImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ultrasound (US) imaging is an affordable, radiation-free screening that has been successfully used for early stage breast cancer screening. Deep learning-based classifiers are currently being used to classify breast cancer. Deep learning requires large amount of dataset for training. However, currently available databases of breast cancer US images are small and the images have tumors of different sizes. Therefore, the deep learning-based classifiers are unable to provide good generalization. To address these challenges, we propose a fusion of three models namely transfer learning, multi-scale and autoencoder. Transfer learning model is based on VGG16 and is used to overcome the issue of limited data. Convolutional autoencoders extract features that can represent even noisy images. We propose a novel multi-scale deep learning model to address learning of US images with tumors of various sizes and shapes. These three models are trained independently and then their classification outputs are fused using differential evolution (DE) algorithm to get the final classification results. The proposed novel fused ensemble of deep learning-based classifiers is evaluated using two publicly available US datasets. Transfer learning, autoencoder, and multi-scale models individually achieve an accuracy of 88%, 85%, and 89% respectively. The fusion of the outputs of the three models using DE algorithm provides a classification accuracy with an accuracy of 93%. The source code available at https://github.com/EbrahimAli1989/Breast-Cancer-classification-.git.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.922
Threshold uncertainty score0.620

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 IEEE International Symposium on Medical Measurements and Applications (MeMeA)Same topicAI in cancer detectionFrench-language works237,207