Data Engineering and AI-Powered Skin Cancer Identification for Healthcare Applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Skin cancer diagnosis, a critical task in the medical domain, can be revolutionized through the application of advanced deep-learning techniques. This work investigates the efficacy of Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) in the automated classification of skin cancer. The process begins with a comprehensive explanation of key CNN layers: Conv2D, MaxPool2D, Dropout, and Dense. The Conv2D layers employ learnable filters that transform localized image segments, while MaxPool2D contributes to downsampling, effectively reducing computational cost and overfitting risk. Integrating these layers enables the network to capture local and global characteristics, which is crucial for accurate classification. Adding Dropout layers enhances generalization and mitigates overfitting by introducing randomness during training. ReLU activation functions infuse non-linearity, and the Flatten layer facilitates the transition to fully connected layers. The proposed CNN architecture is meticulously designed considering filter counts, kernel sizes, and pooling dimensions. The trained model demonstrates promising performance by utilizing the HAM10000 dataset, encompassing diverse skin lesion images across seven classes. The CNN model’s parameters and architecture are systematically presented, offering insights into its design rationale. The model undergoes optimization with the Adam optimizer and annealing techniques to facilitate convergence. The model’s effectiveness is evaluated on validation and test datasets, demonstrating an accuracy of 78.55% and 76.49%, respectively, for skin cancer classification. Data augmentation strategies are introduced to enhance model generalization further. The results underscore CNN’s potential as a robust tool for automating skin cancer diagnosis, aligning with the broader trend of leveraging deep learning for medical image analysis
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
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".