MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386384331 · doi:10.18280/ts.400426

Cloud-Based LeNet-5 CNN for MRI Brain Tumor Diagnosis and Recognition

2023· article· en· W4386384331 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Gajula Srinivasarao, V. Rajesh, Mohamed Baza, Gautam Srivastava, Maazen Alsabaan

Bibliographic record

VenueTraitement du signal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicBrain Tumor Detection and Classification
Canadian institutionsBrandon University
FundersKing Saud University
KeywordsConvolutional neural networkComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceCloud computingPoolingPattern recognition (psychology)Deep learningSegmentationLogistic regressionLocal binary patternsPython (programming language)Machine learningHistogramImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Early and accurate diagnosis of brain tumors is crucial in the medical field, as undetected or misdiagnosed tumors can lead to sudden death.Traditional models for diagnosing brain tumors suffer from low Time of Conversion (ToC) and low accuracy, contributing to a high mortality rate among the 5 million people affected by brain disease annually, as reported by the World Health Organization (WHO).Previous methods, such as Elastic Net Regression (ENR), Logistic Regression (LR), and other machine learning models, struggle to accurately locate and identify brain lesions.Moreover, these models are not suited for cloud-based platforms.To address this issue, we developed a sophisticated, cloud-based brain abnormality detection application using the LeNet-5 Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) on the DriveHQ platform.The pre-trained LeNet-5 model extracts features from ADNI-1, ADNI-2, and MIRIAD datasets.Real-time MRI brain images were collected from Manipal Hospital in Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh, India.The LeNet-5 model employs hidden layers, flattened layers, max-pooling layers, dense layers, and ReLu layers for optimal performance.Our 2D-LeNet-5 CNN approach preprocesses images using split and merge techniques of binary mask segmentation.The Python 3.7 software tool was used to train and test datasets to identify abnormalities in MRI brain images.The proposed application achieved remarkable performance metrics, including 99.65% accuracy, 99.59% sensitivity, 99.72% F1-score, 99.25% recall, 59.32 PSNR, and 0.9929 MCC.These results demonstrate the superiority of our methodology in comparison to existing models, making it a promising solution for cloud-based brain tumor diagnosis and recognition.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.190
Threshold uncertainty score0.519

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations15
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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