MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4316464173 · doi:10.18280/ts.390601

Optimized FPGA-Based Implementation of Brain Tumor Detection by Combining K-Means and Grey Wolf Optimization Algorithms

2022· article· en· W4316464173 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Amin Jarrah, Sereen Amri

Bibliographic record

VenueTraitement du signal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicBrain Tumor Detection and Classification
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsField-programmable gate arrayComputer scienceOptimization algorithmAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceComputer hardwareMathematicsMathematical optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is a need for fast, accurate, and real-time algorithms to detect brain tumors effectively to support the physician's decision-making for treatment purposes.A brain tumor is a lifethreatening uncontrolled growth of cells and tissues that may cause death due to inaccurate and late detection.K-means clustering is one of the clustering techniques that is widely used in brain tumor detection, but it has some drawbacks such as dependency on initial centroid values and a tendency to fall on local optima.This research proposes a new model that uses grey wolf optimization to find the optimal value of K (clusters number) of the k-means algorithm to avoid local optima.A parallel implementation of the K-means clustering algorithm on a field-programmable gate array (FPGA) is also proposed to enhance the performance by reducing the processing time and the power consumption.Moreover, the proposed algorithm is implemented using the Vivado HLS tool on Xilinx Kintex7 XC7K160t FPGA 484-1 where different optimization techniques are adopted and applied, such as loop unrolling, loop pipelining, dataflow, and loop merging.The achieved speed-up of the parallel implementation compared with sequential implementation was 88.17, where the obtained average clustering accuracy was 97.11%.

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 categoriesInsufficient 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.670
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTraitement du signalSame topicBrain Tumor Detection and ClassificationFrench-language works237,207