The DOI matches its Crossref record; 61 of the 61 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Skin Lesion Segmentation and Multiclass Classification Using Deep Learning Features and Improved Moth Flame Optimization
Open accessAbstract
Manual diagnosis of skin cancer is time-consuming and expensive; therefore, it is essential to develop automated diagnostics methods with the ability to classify multiclass skin lesions with greater accuracy. We propose a fully automated approach for multiclass skin lesion segmentation and classification by using the most discriminant deep features. First, the input images are initially enhanced using local color-controlled histogram intensity values (LCcHIV). Next, saliency is estimated using a novel Deep Saliency Segmentation method, which uses a custom convolutional neural network (CNN) of ten layers. The generated heat map is converted into a binary image using a thresholding function. Next, the segmented color lesion images are used for feature extraction by a deep pre-trained CNN model. To avoid the curse of dimensionality, we implement an improved moth flame optimization (IMFO) algorithm to select the most discriminant features. The resultant features are fused using a multiset maximum correlation analysis (MMCA) and classified using the Kernel Extreme Learning Machine (KELM) classifier. The segmentation performance of the proposed methodology is analyzed on ISBI 2016, ISBI 2017, ISIC 2018, and PH2 datasets, achieving an accuracy of 95.38%, 95.79%, 92.69%, and 98.70%, respectively. The classification performance is evaluated on the HAM10000 dataset and achieved an accuracy of 90.67%. To prove the effectiveness of the proposed methods, we present a comparison with the state-of-the-art techniques.
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
Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition
He, K., Zhang, X., Ren, S., & Sun, J. (2016) · 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2016.90 · Cited by 235,474
Densely Connected Convolutional Networks
Huang, G., Liu, Z., Van Der Maaten, L., & Weinberger, K. Q. (2017) · 2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2017.243 · Cited by 48,566
Going deeper with convolutions
Szegedy, C., Liu, W., Jia, Y., Sermanet, P., Reed, S., Anguelov, D., Erhan, D., Vanhoucke, V., & Rabinovich, A. (2015) · 2015 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2015.7298594 · Cited by 48,562
ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challenge
Russakovsky, O., Deng, J., Su, H., Krause, J., Satheesh, S., Ma, S., Huang, Z., Karpathy, A., Khosla, A., Bernstein, M., et al. (2015) · International Journal of Computer Vision · doi:10.1007/s11263-015-0816-y · Cited by 39,380
Siegel, R. L., Miller, K. D., & Jemal, A. (2019) · CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians · doi:10.3322/caac.21551 · Cited by 20,160
Dermatologist-level classification of skin cancer with deep neural networks
Esteva, A., Kuprel, B., Novoa, R. A., Ko, J., Swetter, S. M., Blau, H. M., & Thrun, S. (2017) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature21056 · Cited by 14,362
SLIC Superpixels Compared to State-of-the-Art Superpixel Methods
Achanta, R., Shaji, A., Smith, K., Lucchi, A., Fua, P., & Süsstrunk, S. (2012) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/tpami.2012.120 · Cited by 9,201
A Comprehensive Survey on Transfer Learning
Zhuang, F., Qi, Z., Duan, K., Xi, D., Zhu, Y., Zhu, H., Xiong, H., & He, Q. (2021) · Proceedings of the IEEE · doi:10.1109/jproc.2020.3004555 · Cited by 6,678
Moth-flame optimization algorithm: A novel nature-inspired heuristic paradigm
Mirjalili, S. (2015) · Knowledge-Based Systems · doi:10.1016/j.knosys.2015.07.006 · Cited by 4,626
Tschandl, P., Rosendahl, C., & Kittler, H. (2018) · Scientific Data · doi:10.1038/sdata.2018.161 · Cited by 3,628
Cited by
Deep Learning Application for Effective Classification of Different Types of Psoriasis
Aijaz, S. F., Khan, S. J., Azim, F., Shakeel, C. S., & Hassan, U. (2022) · Journal of Healthcare Engineering · doi:10.1155/2022/7541583 · Cited by 77
Hussain, M., Khan, M. A., Damaševičius, R., Alasiry, A., Marzougui, M., Alhaisoni, M., & Masood, A. (2023) · Diagnostics · doi:10.3390/diagnostics13182869 · Cited by 58
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Khan, M. A., Sharif, M., Akram, T., Damaševičius, R., & Maskeliūnas, R.
- Venue
- Diagnostics
- Publisher
- MDPI AG
- Published
- 2021-04-29
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 811
- ISSN
- 2075-4418 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3158307528
- Cited by
- 281
- References
- 61
- FWCI
- 17.04
- 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: Skin Lesion Segmentation and Multiclass Classification Using Deep Learning Features and Improved Moth Flame Optimization. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3390/diagnostics11050811
- The paper
- Khan, M. A., Sharif, M., Akram, T., Damaševičius, R., & Maskeliūnas, R. (2021). Skin Lesion Segmentation and Multiclass Classification Using Deep Learning Features and Improved Moth Flame Optimization. Diagnostics. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11050811
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.
