Fuzzy C-Means Clustering: A Review of Applications in Breast Cancer Detection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper reviews the potential use of fuzzy c-means clustering (FCM) and explores modifications to the distance function and centroid initialization methods to enhance image segmentation. The application of interest in the paper is the segmentation of breast tumours in mammograms. Breast cancer is the second leading cause of cancer deaths in Canadian women. Early detection reduces treatment costs and offers a favourable prognosis for patients. Classical methods, like mammograms, rely on radiologists to detect cancerous tumours, which introduces the potential for human error in cancer detection. Classical methods are labour-intensive, and, hence, expensive in terms of healthcare resources. Recent research supplements classical methods with automated mammogram analysis. The basic FCM method relies upon the Euclidean distance, which is not optimal for measuring non-spherical structures. To address these limitations, we review the implementation of a Mahalanobis-distance-based FCM (FCM-M). The three objectives of the paper are: (1) review FCM, FCM-M, and three centroid initialization algorithms in the literature, (2) illustrate the effectiveness of these algorithms in image segmentation, and (3) develop a Python package with the optimized algorithms to upload onto GitHub. Image analysis of the algorithms shows that using one of the three centroid initialization algorithms enhances the performance of FCM. FCM-M produced higher clustering accuracy and outlined the tumour structure better than basic FCM.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".