MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408063886 · doi:10.3390/diagnostics15050582

Enhanced Multi-Class Breast Cancer Classification from Whole-Slide Histopathology Images Using a Proposed Deep Learning Model

2025· article· en· W4408063886 on OpenAlexaff
Adnan Rafiq, Arfan Jaffar, Ghazanfar Latif, Sohail Masood, Sherif E. Abdelhamid

Bibliographic record

VenueDiagnostics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsThompson Rivers University
FundersCommonwealth Cyber Initiative
KeywordsBreast cancerMalignancyHistopathologyArtificial intelligenceDeep learningClass (philosophy)CancerMedicineMachine learningPattern recognition (psychology)Computer sciencePathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background/Objectives: Breast cancer is among the most frequently diagnosed cancers and leading cause of mortality worldwide. The accurate classification of breast cancer from the histology photographs is very important for the diagnosis and effective treatment planning. Methods: In this article, we propose a DenseNet121-based deep learning model for breast cancer detection and multi-class classification. The experiments were performed using whole-slide histopathology images collected from the BreakHis dataset. Results: The proposed method attained state-of-the-art performance with a 98.50% accuracy and an AUC of 0.98 for the binary classification. In multi-class classification, it obtained competitive results with 92.50% accuracy and an AUC of 0.94. Conclusions: The proposed model outperforms state-of-the-art methods in distinguishing between benign and malignant tumors as well as in classifying specific malignancy subtypes. This study highlights the potential of deep learning in breast cancer diagnosis and establishes the foundation for developing advanced diagnostic tools.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.845
Threshold uncertainty score0.917

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations16
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiagnosticsSame topicAI in cancer detectionFrench-language works237,207