Multi‐Wound Classification: Exploring Image Enhancement and Deep Learning Techniques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Wounds contribute to 30%–42% of hospital visits and 9% of deaths but remain underreported in Africa. Diseases and surgeries increase wound prevalence, especially in rural areas where 27%–82% of people live, and health facilities are poor or non‐existent. This research aims to design a disease‐related wound classification model for online diagnosis and telemedicine support for traditional health practitioners and village health workers. This paper focuses on wounds from diabetic ulcers, pressure ulcers, surgery, and venous ulcers. The approaches used included Contrast Limited Adaptive Histogram Equalization (CLAHE) with machine and deep learning models, Discrete Wavelet Transformations (DWT) with a novel Gated Wavelet Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) model, and FixCaps, an improved version of Capsule Networks utilizing Convolutional Block Attention Module (CBAM) to reduce spatial information loss. The performance metrics showed similar results for the first two approaches, but FixCaps was the most proficient, with accuracy, precision, recall, and F‐score of 93.83%, 95.41%, 88.63%, and 90.93% respectively. FixCaps had trainable parameters of about 8.28 MB compared with the 195.64 MB of the Gated Wavelet CNN Model.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".