BioSwarmNet: A Revolutionary Approach to Brain Tumour Detection Using Fractional Order Differential Particle Swarm Optimisation and Recurrent Neural Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Brain tumours are a major public health concern, and early and accurate detection is critical in treatment.Early and precise detection of brain tumors is paramount, yet current technologies often struggle to achieve the necessary level of accuracy due to inherent limitations in image processing and classification methodologies.While approaches like convolutional neural networks and optimization techniques have shown promise, they often fall short in capturing intricate patterns and textures or achieving sufficient sensitivity, emphasizing the need for more advanced and integrated solutions like the proposed BioSwarmNet model.The system includes a meticulously designed image processing pipeline that ensures data consistency and quality.BioSwarmNet, a novel combination of Fractional Order Differential Particle Swarm Optimisation (FODPSO) and Recurrent Neural Networks (RNNs), uses swarm intelligence and deep learning to revolutionize medical image classification.Using the well-known BRATS dataset, this study provides a promising avenue for improving diagnostic accuracy and efficiency in brain tumour detection, which has the potential to benefit both healthcare professionals and patients.Notably, the proposed system outperformed in key metrics such as 99.12% accuracy, 98.62% sensitivity, and 99.86% specificity.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".