MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Discriminating COVID-19 from Pneumonia using Machine Learning Algorithms and Chest X-ray Images

2022· article· en· W4313564014 on OpenAlexaff
Rumana Islam, Mohammed Tarique

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Technology (ICIT) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 diagnosis using AI
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmPneumoniaExtractorDeep learningMachine learningComputer scienceCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PopulationMedicinePathologyInfectious disease (medical specialty)DiseaseInternal medicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) test is commonly used to detect COVID-19. However, the RT-PCR test necessitates person-to-person contact to administer and is expensive. Not only that, the diagnostic tests are still unreachable to the majority of the global population. The chest X-ray images are helpful for this purpose as the X-ray machines are available in almost all healthcare facilities. However, the chest X-ray images of COVID-19 and viral pneumonia patients are very similar and often lead to misdiagnosis. This paper presents automated noninvasive algorithms that can identify the X-ray images of COVID patients from that of pneumonia patients. This investigation has employed two algorithms based on machine learning and deep learning approaches. The lower dimension encoded features are extracted from the X-ray images and machine learning algorithms are applied. On the other hand, the deep learning algorithm relies on the inbuilt feature extractor networks to classify the original X-ray images. The simulation results show that the proposed algorithms can discriminate COVID patients from pneumonia patients with the best accuracies of 100% and 98.1% based on pre-trained deep learning and machine learning algorithms, respectively.

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.598
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.158
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.218 · 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.

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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Technology (ICIT)Same topicCOVID-19 diagnosis using AIFrench-language works237,207