2016
DOI: 10.1109/jbhi.2015.2478255
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Improved Patch-Based Automated Liver Lesion Classification by Separate Analysis of the Interior and Boundary Regions

Abstract: The bag-of-visual-words (BoVW) method with construction of a single dictionary of visual words has been used previously for a variety of classification tasks in medical imaging, including the diagnosis of liver lesions. In this paper, we describe a novel method for automated diagnosis of liver lesions in portal-phase computed tomography (CT) images that improves over single-dictionary BoVW methods by using an image patch representation of the interior and boundary regions of the lesions. Our approach captures … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
32
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 45 publications
(32 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
0
32
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Accuracy value for proposed method in three dataset is 98%, 97.65%, and 98.1%. Comparing to other methods, our system specificity is 0.94% superior to Chen et al, 27 4.21% superior to Diamant et al, 28 6.48% superior to Abdar et al 26 (A) and 70% superior to Abdar et al 26 (B). Sensitivity value for proposed method in three dataset is 95.82%, 95%, and 95.34%.…”
Section: Performance Comparisonmentioning
confidence: 57%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…Accuracy value for proposed method in three dataset is 98%, 97.65%, and 98.1%. Comparing to other methods, our system specificity is 0.94% superior to Chen et al, 27 4.21% superior to Diamant et al, 28 6.48% superior to Abdar et al 26 (A) and 70% superior to Abdar et al 26 (B). Sensitivity value for proposed method in three dataset is 95.82%, 95%, and 95.34%.…”
Section: Performance Comparisonmentioning
confidence: 57%
“…Our proposed method is compared with other optimizations for finding best DBN parameters such as GA, PSO, ACO and FA. Proposed method sensitivity is 7.86% superior to Chen et al, 27 7.8% superior to Diamant et al, 28 3.16% superior to Abdar et al 26 (A) and 21.59% superior to Abdar et al 26 (B). Our method is 4.71% higher than GA, 5.82% higher than PSO, 6.87% higher ACO, and 7.68% higher than FA.…”
Section: Performance Comparisonmentioning
confidence: 78%
See 3 more Smart Citations