MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117360372 · doi:10.71146/kjmr777

A HYBRID DATASET-BASED ENSEMBLE STRATEGY FOR EFFICIENT BREAST CANCER DETECTION

2025· article· W7117360372 on OpenAlexaff
Muhammad Sajid Maqbool, Nosheen Fatima, Rubaina Nazeer, Naeem Aslam, Unaiza Sumra, Muqadas Nadeem

Bibliographic record

VenueKashf Journal of Multidisciplinary Research · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast cancerSupport vector machineCancerMammographyRandom forestFeature (linguistics)Breast cancer awarenessFocus (optics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Breast cancer is especially dangerous for women because it kills and hurts a lot of people. Because of this, there is a need for an algorithm that can spot the first signs of breast cancer essential. One of the most common types of cancer in women is breast cancer. Its spread among people is a major worry all over the world. To save the patient's life, it is very important to find the disease and treat it right away. Last year, more than 2.3 million women were told they had breast cancer, and about 0.7 million of them died. Manually diagnosing the disease isn't very good, and most of the time, it's almost impossible to find severe cancer early, which means that the patients die. Machine learning is a key part of figuring out what early signs of breast cancer to look for. In this paper Machine Learning (ML) and Deep Learning (DL) methods can be used to find breast cancer in early stage and accurately to save lives. In this work breast cancer predicted by using a hybrid model to combine ML and DL techniques. Firstly, a DL method Scale-Invariant Feature Transform (SWIFT) is used to extract the meaning full information from the image dataset and then different machine learning models such as (K-Nearest Neighbors (KNN), Random Forest (RF) and Support Vector Machine (SVM)) are applied to classify the malignant and benign cases. Secondly, these models classified the instances into two classes. The main focus of this work is to figure out whether a breast cancer is benign or malignant based on different specific characteristics taken from a group of images from normal and breast cancer patients. The results of contracted ML models compared on the basis of accuracy, precision, Recall and F1-Score. This study used Principal Component Analysis to find the optimized features from the set of extracted features for improving the accuracy of the used models. This is done by using multiple Machine Learning algorithms and choosing the classification model with the highest accuracy.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
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 score0.858
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.337 · 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.

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 venueKashf Journal of Multidisciplinary ResearchSame topicAI in cancer detectionFrench-language works237,207