Cited by 484Brain Tumor Detection and ClassificationRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical ImagingGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment

A Hybrid Feature Extraction Method with Regularized Extreme Learning Machine for Brain Tumor Classification

Open access
Gumaei, Abdu, Hassan, Mohammad Mehedi, Hassan, Md Rafiul, Alelaiwi, Abdulhameed, Fortino, Giancarlo·2019·IEEE Access

Abstract

Brain cancer classification is an important step that depends on the physician's knowledge and experience. An automated tumor classification system is very essential to support radiologists and physicians to identify brain tumors. However, the accuracy of current systems needs to be improved for suitable treatments. In this paper, we propose a hybrid feature extraction method with a regularized extreme learning machine (RELM) for developing an accurate brain tumor classification approach. The approach starts by preprocessing the brain images by using a min-max normalization rule to enhance the contrast of brain edges and regions. Then, the brain tumor features are extracted based on a hybrid method of feature extraction. Finally, a RELM is used for classifying the type of brain tumor. To evaluate and compare the proposed approach, a set of experiments is conducted on a new public dataset of brain images. The experimental results proved that the approach is more effective compared with the existing state-of-the-art approaches, and the performance in terms of classification accuracy improved from 91.51% to 94.233% for the experiment of the random holdout technique.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/access.2019.2904145

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gumaei, A., Hassan, M. M., Hassan, M. R., Alelaiwi, A., & Fortino, G.
Affiliations
  • King Saud University (SA)
  • King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals (SA)
  • University of Calabria (IT)
Venue
IEEE Access
Published
2019
Volume
7
Pages
36266-36273
ISSN
2169-3536 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2921483513
Cited by
484
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 37 · 2025: 66 · 2024: 105 · 2023: 99 · 2022: 85 · 2021: 54 · 2020: 33 · 2019: 5
FWCI
19.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Access (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Archive of Doctoral Theses and Digital Collections (University of Calabria) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Deanship of Scientific Research, King Saud University (RGP-318)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Brain Tumor Detection and Classification
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Genetics › Glioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Keywords
brain tumor classification, hybrid feature extraction, regularized extreme learning machine, brain MRI images, min-max normalization, automated tumor diagnosis, medical image preprocessing

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review