Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 228

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Automated Mass Detection in Mammograms Using Cascaded Deep Learning and Random Forests

Dhungel, Neeraj, Carneiro, Gustavo, Bradley, Andrew P.·2015·2015 International Conference on Digital Image Computing: Techniques and Applications (DICTA)

Abstract

Mass detection from mammograms plays a crucial role as a pre- processing stage for mass segmentation and classification. The detection of masses from mammograms is considered to be a challenging problem due to their large variation in shape, size, boundary and texture and also because of their low signal to noise ratio compared to the surrounding breast tissue. In this paper, we present a novel approach for detecting masses in mammograms using a cascade of deep learning and random forest classifiers. The first stage classifier consists of a multi-scale deep belief network that selects suspicious regions to be further processed by a two-level cascade of deep convolutional neural networks. The regions that survive this deep learning analysis are then processed by a two-level cascade of random forest classifiers that use morphological and texture features extracted from regions selected along the cascade. Finally, regions that survive the cascade of random forest classifiers are combined using connected component analysis to produce state-of-the-art results. We also show that the proposed cascade of deep learning and random forest classifiers are effective in the reduction of false positive regions, while maintaining a high true positive detection rate. We tested our mass detection system on two publicly available datasets: DDSM-BCRP and INbreast. The final mass detection produced by our approach achieves the best results on these publicly available datasets with a true positive rate of 0.96 ± 0.03 at 1.2 false positive per image on INbreast and true positive rate of 0.75 at 4.8 false positive per image on DDSM-BCRP.

Overview

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/dicta.2015.7371234

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 228

Metadata

Authors
Dhungel, N., Carneiro, G., & Bradley, A. P.
Venue
2015 International Conference on Digital Image Computing: Techniques and Applications (DICTA)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2015-11
Pages
1-8
OpenAlex
W2240965754
Cited by
228
References
1
FWCI
10.23
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Automated Mass Detection in Mammograms Using Cascaded Deep Learning and Random Forests. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/dicta.2015.7371234
The paper
Dhungel, N., Carneiro, G., & Bradley, A. P. (2015). Automated Mass Detection in Mammograms Using Cascaded Deep Learning and Random Forests. 2015 International Conference on Digital Image Computing: Techniques and Applications (DICTA). https://doi.org/10.1109/dicta.2015.7371234

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.