MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402307188 · doi:10.18280/ts.410447

Optimizing Lung Cancer Classification with Extreme Learning Machine and Ant Lion Optimization for Enhanced Early Detection

2024· article· en· W4402307188 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Vidhya Rengasamy, Mirnalinee Thanka Nadar

Bibliographic record

VenueTraitement du signal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning and ELM
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsANTArtificial intelligenceExtreme learning machineComputer scienceMachine learningLung cancerPattern recognition (psychology)MedicinePathologyArtificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lung cancer emerges as a notable cancer affecting individuals of all genders on a global scale.Timely detection in its early stages significantly increases the chances of survival.In recent years, the advent of automatic lung cancer detection systems has played a significant role in enhancing diagnostic rates.Despite the advantages presented by machine learning models over traditional methods and their breakthroughs in various image classification tasks, accurately classifying lung cancer remains a challenge.This challenge is attributed to the complexity involved in selecting an appropriate machine learning model and fine-tuning hyperparameters.This paper aims to enhance the performance of a lung cancer classification system by optimizing hyperparameters in the Extreme Learning Machine (ELM) using metaheuristic optimization algorithms.To achieve this, Ant Lion Optimization algorithms are employed to determine optimal weight values for ELM.The novelty of this work lies in the application of ALO to enhance the performance of ELM specifically for lung cancer diagnosis, addressing a crucial gap in existing methodologies.Initially, features are extracted from Convolutional Neural Network (CNN).Subsequently, the optimal weight values and features are utilized in the ELM for the classification of Lung CT images as benign or malignant.The impact of applying hyperparameter optimization is assessed on two benchmark datasets, LIDC-IDRI and KAGGLE.The accuracy of lung cancer prediction using our method reaches 99.5% on the LIDC-IDRI dataset and 99.3% on the KAGGLE dataset.The findings of this study suggest that the proposed method outperforms existing approaches in the diagnosis of lung cancer.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.253
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueTraitement du signalSame topicMachine Learning and ELMFrench-language works237,207