MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406786807 · doi:10.18280/isi.300112

Region of Interest-Based Breast Cancer Detection with Oversampling Technique

2025· article· en· W4406786807 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Defri Kurniawan, Abu Salam, Yani Parti Astuti, Catur Supriyanto, Guruh Fajar Shidik, Pulung Nurtantio Andono, Noor Zuraidin Mohd Safar

Bibliographic record

VenueIngénierie des systèmes d information · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOversamplingBreast cancerOncologyMedicineComputer scienceCancerInternal medicineTelecommunicationsBandwidth (computing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Breast cancer detection using medical imaging remains a challenging task due to the large volume of mammograms and the inherent class imbalance in datasets.This study proposes a novel regions of interest (ROIs)-based approach using RSNA screening mammography breast cancer detection dataset.By focusing on specific ROIs within the mammograms, the computational load is reduced while allowing the model to concentrate on the most critical areas.Additionally, SMOTE Tomek Link is applied to mitigate the class imbalance by generating synthetic samples for the minority (cancerous) class and removing noisy or overlapping samples.Three dataset splits were created: Split 1 (5:1 ratio of normal to cancer cases), Split 2 (3:1), and a fully balanced Random Under-Sampling (RUS) dataset.Various CNN models, including InceptionV3, ResNet152V2, DenseNet201, and EfficientNetB7, were evaluated on different dataset splits.Our results demonstrate that the EfficientNetB7 model, in conjunction with ROI extraction and SMOTE Tomek Link, achieves the highest accuracy of 97.41% on the Split 2 dataset, highlighting the effectiveness of these preprocessing techniques in enhancing deep learning-based breast cancer detection.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIngénierie des systèmes d informationSame topicAI in cancer detectionFrench-language works237,207