The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Brain Tumor Segmentation Based on Local Independent Projection-Based Classification
Abstract
Brain tumor segmentation is an important procedure for early tumor diagnosis and radiotherapy planning. Although numerous brain tumor segmentation methods have been presented, enhancing tumor segmentation methods is still challenging because brain tumor MRI images exhibit complex characteristics, such as high diversity in tumor appearance and ambiguous tumor boundaries. To address this problem, we propose a novel automatic tumor segmentation method for MRI images. This method treats tumor segmentation as a classification problem. Additionally, the local independent projection-based classification (LIPC) method is used to classify each voxel into different classes. A novel classification framework is derived by introducing the local independent projection into the classical classification model. Locality is important in the calculation of local independent projections for LIPC. Locality is also considered in determining whether local anchor embedding is more applicable in solving linear projection weights compared with other coding methods. Moreover, LIPC considers the data distribution of different classes by learning a softmax regression model, which can further improve classification performance. In this study, 80 brain tumor MRI images with ground truth data are used as training data and 40 images without ground truth data are used as testing data. The segmentation results of testing data are evaluated by an online evaluation tool. The average dice similarities of the proposed method for segmenting complete tumor, tumor core, and contrast-enhancing tumor on real patient data are 0.84, 0.685, and 0.585, respectively. These results are comparable to other state-of-the-art methods.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cortes, C., & Vapnik, V. (1995) · Machine Learning · doi:10.1007/bf00994018 · Cited by 59,421
A nonparametric method for automatic correction of intensity nonuniformity in MRI data
Sled, J. G., Zijdenbos, A. P., & Evans, A. C. (1998) · IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging · doi:10.1109/42.668698 · Cited by 4,731
Locality-constrained Linear Coding for image classification
Wang, J., Yang, J., Yu, K., Lv, F., Huang, T., & Gong, Y. (2010) · 2010 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2010.5540018 · Cited by 3,100
Multi-Atlas Segmentation with Joint Label Fusion
Wang, H., Suh, J. W., Das, S. R., Pluta, J. B., Craige, C., & Yushkevich, P. A. (2013) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/tpami.2012.143 · Cited by 796
Decision Forests for Tissue-Specific Segmentation of High-Grade Gliomas in Multi-channel MR
Zikic, D., Glocker, B., Konukoglu, E., Criminisi, A., Demiralp, C., Shotton, J., Thomas, O. M., Das, T., Jena, R., & Price, S. J. (2012) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-33454-2_46 · Cited by 276
Cited by
CE-Net: Context Encoder Network for 2D Medical Image Segmentation
Gu, Z., Cheng, J., Fu, H., Zhou, K., Hao, H., Zhao, Y., Zhang, T., Gao, S., & Liu, J. (2019) · IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging · doi:10.1109/tmi.2019.2903562 · Cited by 2,267
Brain tumor detection and classification using machine learning: a comprehensive survey
Amin, J., Sharif, M., Haldorai, A., Yasmin, M., & Nayak, R. S. (2022) · Complex & Intelligent Systems · doi:10.1007/s40747-021-00563-y · Cited by 503
Brain tumor detection using fusion of hand crafted and deep learning features
Saba, T., Sameh Mohamed, A., El-Affendi, M., Amin, J., & Sharif, M. (2020) · Cognitive Systems Research · doi:10.1016/j.cogsys.2019.09.007 · Cited by 433
Brain Tumor Classification Using Convolutional Neural Networks
Seetha, J., & Raja, S. S. (2018) · Biomedical and Pharmacology Journal · doi:10.13005/bpj/1511 · Cited by 425
Muhammad, K., Khan, S., Ser, J. D., & Albuquerque, V. H. C. D. (2021) · IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems · doi:10.1109/tnnls.2020.2995800 · Cited by 398
Metadata
- Authors
- Huang, M., Yang, W., Wu, Y., Jiang, J., Chen, W., & Feng, Q.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering
- Published
- 2014-10
- Volume
- 61
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 2633-2645
- ISSN
- 0018-9294 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-2531
- OpenAlex
- W2044523788
- Cited by
- 219
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 6.18
- Type
- journal article
- 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
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.