MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406887277 · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-86752-y

Dilated SE-DenseNet for brain tumor MRI classification

2025· article· en· W4406887277 on OpenAlexaff
Yu M, Jiwook Kim, Lena Podina, Mohammad Kohandel

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicBrain Tumor Detection and Classification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMagnetic resonance imagingBrain tumorArtificial intelligenceComputational biologyMedicinePattern recognition (psychology)PathologyRadiologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the field of medical imaging, particularly MRI-based brain tumor classification, we propose an advanced convolutional neural network (CNN) leveraging the DenseNet-121 architecture, enhanced with dilated convolutional layers and Squeeze-and-Excitation (SE) networks' attention mechanisms. This novel approach aims to improve upon state-of-the-art methods of tumor identification. Our model, trained and evaluated on a comprehensive Kaggle brain tumor dataset, demonstrated superior performance over established convolution-based and transformer-based models: ResNet-101, VGG-19, original DenseNet-121, MobileNet-V2, ViT-L/16, and Swin-B across key metrics: F1-score, accuracy, precision, and recall. The results underscore the effectiveness of our architectural enhancements in medical image analysis. Future research directions include optimizing dilation layers and exploring various architectural configurations. The study highlights the significant role of machine learning in improving diagnostic accuracy in medical imaging, with potential applications extending beyond brain tumor detection to other medical imaging tasks.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

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)0.0040.002

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.264 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations31
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicBrain Tumor Detection and ClassificationFrench-language works237,207