Application Exploration of Medical Image-aided Diagnosis of Breast TumourBased on Deep Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nowadays, people attach increasing importance to accurate and timely disease diagnosis and personalized treatment. Because of the uncertainty and latency of the pathogenesis, it is difficult to detect breast tumour early. With higher resolution, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has become an important method for early detection of cancer in recent years. At present, DL technology can automatically study imaging features of different depths. OBJECTIVE: This work aimed to use DL to study medical image-assisted diagnosis. METHODS: The image data were collected from the patients. ROI (region of interest) containing the complete tumor area in the medical image was generated. The ROI image was extracted, and the extracted feature data were expanded. By constructing a three-dimensional (3D) CNN model, the evaluation indicators of breast tumour diagnosis results have been proposed. In the experiment part, 3D CNN model and other models have been used to diagnose the medical image of breast tumour. RESULTS: The 3D CNN model exhibited good ROI region extraction effect and breast tumor image diagnosis effect, and the average diagnostic accuracy of breast tumor image diagnosis was 0.736, which has been found to be much higher than other models and could be applied to breast tumor medical image-aided diagnosis. CONCLUSION: The 3D CNN model has been trained by combining the two-dimensional CNN training mode, and the evaluation index of diagnostic results has been established. The experimental part verified the medical image diagnosis effect of the 3D CNN model. The model had exhibited a high ROI region extraction effect and breast tumor image diagnosis effect.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".