MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409264418 · doi:10.3390/s25082349

A Multitask CNN for Near-Infrared Probe: Enhanced Real-Time Breast Cancer Imaging

2025· article· en· W4409264418 on OpenAlexafffund
Maryam Momtahen, Farid Golnaraghi

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfrared Thermography in Medicine
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersMichael Smith Health Research BC
KeywordsJaccard indexComputer scienceConvolutional neural networkArtificial intelligenceMammographyPattern recognition (psychology)WorkflowBreast cancerCancerMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The early detection of breast cancer, particularly in dense breast tissues, faces significant challenges with traditional imaging techniques such as mammography. This study utilizes a Near-infrared Scan (NIRscan) probe and an advanced convolutional neural network (CNN) model to enhance tumor localization accuracy and efficiency. CNN processed data from 133 breast phantoms into 266 samples using data augmentation techniques, such as mirroring. The model significantly improved image reconstruction, achieving an RMSE of 0.0624, MAE of 0.0360, R2 of 0.9704, and Fuzzy Jaccard Index of 0.9121. Subsequently, we introduced a multitask CNN that reconstructs images and classifies them based on depth, length, and health status, further enhancing its diagnostic capabilities. This multitasking approach leverages the robust feature extraction capabilities of CNNs to perform complex tasks simultaneously, thereby improving the model’s efficiency and accuracy. It achieved exemplary classification accuracies in depth (100%), length (92.86%), and health status, with a perfect F1 Score. These results highlight the promise of NIRscan technology, in combination with a multitask CNN model, as a supportive tool for improving real-time breast cancer screening and diagnostic workflows.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.467
Threshold uncertainty score0.967

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 designBench or experimental
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicInfrared Thermography in MedicineFrench-language works237,207