Web–Based Framework For Breast Cancer Classification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The aim of this work is to create a web-based system that will assist its users in the cancer diagnosis process by means of automatic classification of cytological images obtained during fine needle aspiration biopsy. This paper contains a description of the study on the quality of the various algorithms used for the segmentation and classification of breast cancer malignancy. The object of the study is to classify the degree of malignancy of breast cancer cases from fine needle aspiration biopsy images into one of the two classes of malignancy, high or intermediate. For that purpose we have compared 3 segmentation methods: k-means, fuzzy c-means and watershed, and based on these segmentations we have constructed a 25–element feature vector. The feature vector was introduced as an input to 8 classifiers and their accuracy was checked. The results show that the highest classification accuracy of 89.02 % was recorded for the multilayer perceptron. Fuzzy c–means proved to be the most accurate segmentation algorithm, but at the same time it is the most computationally intensive among the three studied segmentation methods.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
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".