The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Application of the mutual information criterion for feature selection in computer‐aided diagnosis
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate an information theoretic approach to feature selection for computer‐aided diagnosis (CAD). The approach is based on the mutual information (MI) concept. MI measures the general dependence of random variables without making any assumptions about the nature of their underlying relationships. Consequently, MI can potentially offer some advantages over feature selection techniques that focus only on the linear relationships of variables. This study was based on a database of statistical texture features extracted from perfusion lung scans. The ultimate goal was to select the optimal subset of features for the computer‐aided diagnosis of acute pulmonary embolism (PE). Initially, the study addressed issues regarding the approximation of MI in a limited dataset as it is often the case in CAD applications. The MI selected features were compared to those features selected using stepwise linear discriminant analysis and genetic algorithms for the same PE database. Linear and nonlinear decision models were implemented to merge the selected features into a final diagnosis. Results showed that the MI is an effective feature selection criterion for nonlinear CAD models overcoming some of the well‐known limitations and computational complexities of other popular feature selection techniques in the field.
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
Textural Features for Image Classification
Haralick, R. M., Shanmugam, K., & Dinstein, I. (1973) · IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics · doi:10.1109/tsmc.1973.4309314 · Cited by 22,886
Cited by
Network‐based classification of breast cancer metastasis
Chuang, H., Lee, E., Liu, Y., Lee, D., & Ideker, T. (2007) · Molecular Systems Biology · doi:10.1038/msb4100180 · Cited by 1,431
Cheng, J.-Z., Ni, D., Chou, Y.-H., Qin, J., Tiu, C.-M., Chang, Y.-C., Huang, C.-S., Shen, D., & Chen, C.-M. (2016) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep24454 · Cited by 755
A deep learning framework for supporting the classification of breast lesions in ultrasound images
Han, S., Kang, H.-K., Jeong, J.-Y., Park, M.-H., Kim, W., Bang, W.-C., & Seong, Y.-K. (2017) · Physics in Medicine & Biology · doi:10.1088/1361-6560/aa82ec · Cited by 358
Giger, M. L., Chan, H., & Boone, J. (2008) · Medical Physics · doi:10.1118/1.3013555 · Cited by 311
Data based identification and prediction of nonlinear and complex dynamical systems
Wang, W.-X., Lai, Y.-C., & Grebogi, C. (2016) · Physics Reports · doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2016.06.004 · Cited by 299
Metadata
- Authors
- Tourassi, G. D., Frederick, E. D., Markey, M. K., & Floyd, C. E.
- Venue
- Medical Physics
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2001-12
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 2394-2402
- ISSN
- 0094-2405 (ISSN-L)
- 2473-4209
- OpenAlex
- W2002844845
- Cited by
- 221
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 2.24
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Application of the mutual information criterion for feature selection in computer‐aided diagnosis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1118/1.1418724
- The paper
- Tourassi, G. D., Frederick, E. D., Markey, M. K., & Floyd, C. E. (2001). Application of the mutual information criterion for feature selection in computer‐aided diagnosis. Medical Physics. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.1418724
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.