Integrative hybrid deep learning for enhanced breast cancer diagnosis: leveraging the Wisconsin Breast Cancer Database and the CBIS-DDSM dataset
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this investigation was to improve the diagnosis of breast cancer by combining two significant datasets: the Wisconsin Breast Cancer Database and the DDSM Curated Breast Imaging Subset (CBIS-DDSM). The Wisconsin Breast Cancer Database provides a detailed examination of the characteristics of cell nuclei, including radius, texture, and concavity, for 569 patients, of which 212 had malignant tumors. In addition, the CBIS-DDSM dataset-a revised variant of the Digital Database for Screening Mammography (DDSM)-offers a standardized collection of 2,620 scanned film mammography studies, including cases that are normal, benign, or malignant and that include verified pathology data. To identify complex patterns and trait diagnoses of breast cancer, this investigation used a hybrid deep learning methodology that combines Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) with the stochastic gradients method. The Wisconsin Breast Cancer Database is used for CNN training, while the CBIS-DDSM dataset is used for fine-tuning to maximize adaptability across a variety of mammography investigations. Data integration, feature extraction, model development, and thorough performance evaluation are the main objectives. The diagnostic effectiveness of the algorithm was evaluated by the area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve (AUC-ROC), sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy. The generalizability of the model will be validated by independent validation on additional datasets. This research provides an accurate, comprehensible, and therapeutically applicable breast cancer detection method that will advance the field. These predicted results might greatly increase early diagnosis, which could promote improvements in breast cancer research and eventually lead to improved 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 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 | 0.003 | 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".