MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393182497 · doi:10.4108/eetpht.10.5549

Deep Learning in Medical Imaging: A Case Study on Lung Tissue Classification

2024· article· en· W4393182497 on OpenAlexaff
Sandeep Kumar Panda, Janjhyam Venkata Naga Ramesh, Hritwik Ghosh, Irfan Sadiq Rahat, Abdus Sobur, Mehadi Hasan Bijoy, Mannava Yesubabu

Bibliographic record

VenueEAI Endorsed Transactions on Pervasive Health and Technology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsWycliffe College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceMedical imagingLungComputer scienceComputer visionMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: In the field of medical imaging, accurate categorization of lung tissue is essential for timely diagnosis and management of lung-related conditions, including cancer. Deep Learning (DL) methodologies have revolutionized this domain, promising improved precision and effectiveness in diagnosing ailments based on image analysis. This research delves into the application of DL models for classifying lung tissue, particularly focusing on histopathological imagery. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this study is to explore the deployment of DL models for the classification of lung tissue, emphasizing histopathological images. The research aims to assess the performance of various DL models in accurately distinguishing between different classes of lung tissue, including benign tissue, lung adenocarcinoma, and lung squamous cell carcinoma. METHODS: A dataset comprising 9,000 histopathological images of lung tissue was utilized, sourced from HIPAA compliant and validated sources. The dataset underwent augmentation to ensure diversity and robustness. The images were categorized into three distinct classes and balanced before being split into training, validation, and testing sets. Six DL models - DenseNet201, EfficientNetB7, EfficientNetB5, Vgg19, Vgg16, and Alexnet - were trained and evaluated on this dataset. Performance assessment was conducted based on precision, recall, F1-score for each class, and overall accuracy. RESULTS: The results revealed varying performance levels among the DL models, with EfficientNetB5 achieving perfect scores across all metrics. This highlights the capability of DL in improving the accuracy of lung tissue classification, which holds promise for enhancing diagnosis and treatment outcomes in lung-related conditions. CONCLUSION: This research significantly contributes to understanding the effective utilization of DL models in medical imaging, particularly for lung tissue classification. It emphasizes the critical role of a diverse and balanced dataset in developing robust and accurate models. The insights gained from this study lay the groundwork for further exploration into refining DL methodologies for medical imaging applications, with a focus on improving diagnostic accuracy and ultimately, patient outcomes.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.991
Threshold uncertainty score0.705

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEAI Endorsed Transactions on Pervasive Health and TechnologySame topicAI in cancer detectionFrench-language works237,207