Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 237

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Breast Cancer Diagnosis in Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Effects of Training Sample Size on Multi-Stage Transfer Learning Using Deep Neural Nets

Open access
Samala, Ravi K., Chan, Heang-Ping, Hadjiiski, Lubomir, Helvie, Mark A., Richter, Caleb D., Cha, Kenny H.·2019·IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging

Abstract

In this paper, we developed a deep convolutional neural network (CNN) for the classification of malignant and benign masses in digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) using a multi-stage transfer learning approach that utilized data from similar auxiliary domains for intermediate-stage fine-tuning. Breast imaging data from DBT, digitized screen-film mammography, and digital mammography totaling 4039 unique regions of interest (1797 malignant and 2242 benign) were collected. Using cross validation, we selected the best transfer network from six transfer networks by varying the level up to which the convolutional layers were frozen. In a single-stage transfer learning approach, knowledge from CNN trained on the ImageNet data was fine-tuned directly with the DBT data. In a multi-stage transfer learning approach, knowledge learned from ImageNet was first fine-tuned with the mammography data and then fine-tuned with the DBT data. Two transfer networks were compared for the second-stage transfer learning by freezing most of the CNN structures versus freezing only the first convolutional layer. We studied the dependence of the classification performance on training sample size for various transfer learning and fine-tuning schemes by varying the training data from 1% to 100% of the available sets. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was used as a performance measure. The view-based AUC on the test set for single-stage transfer learning was 0.85 ± 0.05 and improved significantly (p <; 0.05$ ) to 0.91 ± 0.03 for multi-stage learning. This paper demonstrated that, when the training sample size from the target domain is limited, an additional stage of transfer learning using data from a similar auxiliary domain is advantageous.

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/tmi.2018.2870343

Cites

6 of 6 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 6 references

Cited by

See all 237

Metadata

Authors
Samala, R. K., Chan, H.-P., Hadjiiski, L., Helvie, M. A., Richter, C. D., & Cha, K. H.
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging
Published
2019-03
Volume
38
Issue
3
Pages
686-696
ISSN
  • 0278-0062 (ISSN-L)
  • 1558-254X
OpenAlex
W2892235178
Cited by
237
References
6
FWCI
11.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Breast Cancer Diagnosis in Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Effects of Training Sample Size on Multi-Stage Transfer Learning Using Deep Neural Nets. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tmi.2018.2870343
The paper
Samala, R. K., Chan, H.-P., Hadjiiski, L., Helvie, M. A., Richter, C. D., & Cha, K. H. (2019). Breast Cancer Diagnosis in Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Effects of Training Sample Size on Multi-Stage Transfer Learning Using Deep Neural Nets. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging. https://doi.org/10.1109/tmi.2018.2870343

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.