2015 International Conference on Automation, Cognitive Science, Optics, Micro Electro-Mechanical System, and Information Techno 2015
DOI: 10.1109/icacomit.2015.7440189
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The comparison of GVF Snake Active Contour method and Ellipse Fit in optic disc detection for glaucoma diagnosis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
3

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
5
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Table III and Table IV discussed performance of the proposed GlaucoNet+ model with different classification setups (Table III) and configuration (Table IV); however to further examine efficacy of our proposed model in comparison to the other existing glaucoma detection and classification methods, we have performed analysis based on secondary resources (reviewing existing methods or allied papers). [49] 84.38 --- [54] 95.50 --- [60] --- [64] 88.00 --- [35] --98.60 - [36] 99.20 -86.00 - [65] ---- [47] 80.00 -95.00 - [48] 97.00 --- [57] 98 --- [39] 94.10 -91.80 - [75] 90.00 --- [40] --92.00 - [33] 100.00 -94.00 - [59] ---- [66] 89.6 (NB) 97.6(AN N) --- [67] 92.00 --- [68] ---- [69] 72.38 --- [70] 79.00 -87.00 - [71] 83.10 --- [62] 93.00 --- [72] 96.67 -100.00 - [73] 91.00 --- [74] 92.00 --- [4] 0.8478 - [55] 88. Observing the results, it can be found that the proposed GlaucoNet+ model with Hybrid feature extraction and SVM (polynomial) with 10-fold cross validation outperforms major existing approaches.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Table III and Table IV discussed performance of the proposed GlaucoNet+ model with different classification setups (Table III) and configuration (Table IV); however to further examine efficacy of our proposed model in comparison to the other existing glaucoma detection and classification methods, we have performed analysis based on secondary resources (reviewing existing methods or allied papers). [49] 84.38 --- [54] 95.50 --- [60] --- [64] 88.00 --- [35] --98.60 - [36] 99.20 -86.00 - [65] ---- [47] 80.00 -95.00 - [48] 97.00 --- [57] 98 --- [39] 94.10 -91.80 - [75] 90.00 --- [40] --92.00 - [33] 100.00 -94.00 - [59] ---- [66] 89.6 (NB) 97.6(AN N) --- [67] 92.00 --- [68] ---- [69] 72.38 --- [70] 79.00 -87.00 - [71] 83.10 --- [62] 93.00 --- [72] 96.67 -100.00 - [73] 91.00 --- [74] 92.00 --- [4] 0.8478 - [55] 88. Observing the results, it can be found that the proposed GlaucoNet+ model with Hybrid feature extraction and SVM (polynomial) with 10-fold cross validation outperforms major existing approaches.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nonetheless, the method may fail in poor-quality images. Kusumandari et al [24] presented a comparison of GVF snakes and the ellipse-fitting method in detecting the OD. They concluded that the GVF gives better accuracy than the ellipse-fitting method.…”
Section: Od Segmentationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As preprocessing authors applied 2D median filter and Multi threshold methods. Researches [38][39][40][41][42][43] state that the majority of classical CDR based approaches suffer inaccuracy in prediction, especially in OC detection over the horizontally identified disk region that makes overall detection output suspicious. In [45], authors pre-processed input with filtering, green channel extraction and CLAHE implementation to achieve better CDR estimation.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%