Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 293

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Retrieval of Brain Tumors by Adaptive Spatial Pooling and Fisher Vector Representation

Open access
Cheng, Jun, Yang, Wei, Huang, Meiyan, Huang, Wei, Jiang, Jun, Zhou, Yujia, Yang, Ru, Zhao, Jie, Feng, Yanqiu, Feng, Qianjin, Chen, Wufan·2016·PLOS ONE

Abstract

Content-based image retrieval (CBIR) techniques have currently gained increasing popularity in the medical field because they can use numerous and valuable archived images to support clinical decisions. In this paper, we concentrate on developing a CBIR system for retrieving brain tumors in T1-weighted contrast-enhanced MRI images. Specifically, when the user roughly outlines the tumor region of a query image, brain tumor images in the database of the same pathological type are expected to be returned. We propose a novel feature extraction framework to improve the retrieval performance. The proposed framework consists of three steps. First, we augment the tumor region and use the augmented tumor region as the region of interest to incorporate informative contextual information. Second, the augmented tumor region is split into subregions by an adaptive spatial division method based on intensity orders; within each subregion, we extract raw image patches as local features. Third, we apply the Fisher kernel framework to aggregate the local features of each subregion into a respective single vector representation and concatenate these per-subregion vector representations to obtain an image-level signature. After feature extraction, a closed-form metric learning algorithm is applied to measure the similarity between the query image and database images. Extensive experiments are conducted on a large dataset of 3604 images with three types of brain tumors, namely, meningiomas, gliomas, and pituitary tumors. The mean average precision can reach 94.68%. Experimental results demonstrate the power of the proposed algorithm against some related state-of-the-art methods on the same dataset.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0157112

Cites

4 of 4 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 4 references

Cited by

See all 293

Metadata

Authors
Cheng, J., Yang, W., Huang, M., Huang, W., Jiang, J., Zhou, Y., Yang, R., Zhao, J., Feng, Y., Feng, Q., & Chen, W.
Venue
PLOS ONE
Published
2016-06-06
Volume
11
Issue
6
Pages
e0157112
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2416025122
Cited by
293
References
4
FWCI
6.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: Retrieval of Brain Tumors by Adaptive Spatial Pooling and Fisher Vector Representation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pone.0157112
The paper
Cheng, J., Yang, W., Huang, M., Huang, W., Jiang, J., Zhou, Y., Yang, R., Zhao, J., Feng, Y., Feng, Q., & Chen, W. (2016). Retrieval of Brain Tumors by Adaptive Spatial Pooling and Fisher Vector Representation. PLOS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0157112

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.