An Efficient Brain Tumor Segmentation Method Based on Adaptive Moving Self-Organizing Map and Fuzzy K-Mean Clustering
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Brain tumors in Magnetic resonance image segmentation is challenging research. With the advent of a new era and research into machine learning, tumor detection and segmentation generated significant interest in the research world. This research presents an efficient tumor detection and segmentation technique using an adaptive moving self-organizing map and Fuzzyk-mean clustering (AMSOM-FKM). The proposed method mainly focused on tumor segmentation using extraction of the tumor region. AMSOM is an artificial neural technique whose training is unsupervised. This research utilized the online Kaggle Brats-18 brain tumor dataset. This dataset consisted of 1691 images. The dataset was partitioned into 70% training, 20% testing, and 10% validation. The proposed model was based on various phases: (a) removal of noise, (b) selection of feature attributes, (c) image classification, and (d) tumor segmentation. At first, the MR images were normalized using the Wiener filtering method, and the Gray level co-occurrences matrix (GLCM) was used to extract the relevant feature attributes. The tumor images were separated from non-tumor images using the AMSOM classification approach. At last, the FKM was used to distinguish the tumor region from the surrounding tissue. The proposed AMSOM-FKM technique and existing methods, i.e., Fuzzy-C-means and K-mean (FMFCM), hybrid self-organization mapping-FKM, were implemented over MATLAB and compared based on comparison parameters, i.e., sensitivity, precision, accuracy, and similarity index values. The proposed technique achieved more than 10% better results than existing methods.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".