2019
DOI: 10.21924/cst.4.2.2019.128
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Malaria parasite segmentation using U-Net: Comparative study of loss functions

Abstract: The convolutional neural network is commonly used for classification. However, convolutional networks can also be used for semantic segmentation using the fully convolutional network approach. U-Net is one example of a fully convolutional network architecture capable of producing accurate segmentation on biomedical images. This paper proposes to use U-Net for Plasmodium segmentation on thin blood smear images. The evaluation shows that U-Net can accurately perform Plasmodium segmentation on thin blood smear im… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2
2
2

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 23 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…To compare this study with our previous work, different variations of the U-Net architecture, including base U-Net [ 18 ], attention U-Net [ 68 ], and attention residual (ARes) U-Net [ 69 ], were employed to be compared with the proposed CNN models in the performance of semantic segmentation tasks [ 17 ]. In this study, binary cross-entropy (BCE) was employed as a loss function to train the U-Net models [ 70 ]. Table 3 and Table 4 compare the performance metrics of the studied methods.…”
Section: Results and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To compare this study with our previous work, different variations of the U-Net architecture, including base U-Net [ 18 ], attention U-Net [ 68 ], and attention residual (ARes) U-Net [ 69 ], were employed to be compared with the proposed CNN models in the performance of semantic segmentation tasks [ 17 ]. In this study, binary cross-entropy (BCE) was employed as a loss function to train the U-Net models [ 70 ]. Table 3 and Table 4 compare the performance metrics of the studied methods.…”
Section: Results and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%