2016 23rd International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR) 2016
DOI: 10.1109/icpr.2016.7899844
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Hybrid deep learning for Reflectance Confocal Microscopy skin images

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
24
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
24
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Deep learning methods by Bozkurt et al 16 and Kaur et al 12 seem to also take into account the dependencies between images to perform the classification, the author did not observe any incoherent transitions, but the regression might lack interpretability. We have proposed a method to segment the DEJ in confocal microscopy images.…”
Section: Comparison To State-of-the-art Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Deep learning methods by Bozkurt et al 16 and Kaur et al 12 seem to also take into account the dependencies between images to perform the classification, the author did not observe any incoherent transitions, but the regression might lack interpretability. We have proposed a method to segment the DEJ in confocal microscopy images.…”
Section: Comparison To State-of-the-art Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Kaur et al 12 used a hybrid of classical methods in texture recognition and recent deep learning methods, which gives good results on a moderate size database of 15 stacks. They classify each confocal image as one of the skin layers.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The majority of the published algorithms described automated methods of stratifying skin layers in RCM images by labeling each of the epidermal strata in groups from the stratum corneum to the basal layer [12,[24][25][26]43,44,46] and delineating the DEJ from the epidermis and dermis [47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55]. Table 2 summarizes the methods described for epidermal stratification.…”
Section: Skin Stratificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Sensitivity and specificity were maximized with these techniques as well, achieving 87% and 94%, respectively [12,44]. Algorithms stratifying the epidermal layers with texture and feature analysis combined with logistic regression, conditional random fields, or support vector machines (SVMs) [24,25,43] were found to have inferior accuracies, sensitivities, and specificities when compared with neural network-based algorithms [12,26,44]. One algorithm attempting to delineate only the stratum corneum using texture analysis and wavelet transformation performed at 82.89% accuracy compared to ground-truth expert labeling of slices [46].…”
Section: Skin Stratificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Kawahara et al [16] used convolution neural network (CNN) early on to classify dermatologic images and achieved good results. Kaur et al [17] demonstrated that the classification accuracy of hybrid deep learning method could reach up to 82.0% among six kinds of skin images, which was better than the traditional CNN models. Romero-Lopez et al [18] exploited VGGNet to classify benign and malignant types of skin cancer and achieved a classification accuracy of 78.66% based on the International Skin Imaging Collaboration (ISIC) dataset.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%