2018 8th International Conference on Computer and Knowledge Engineering (ICCKE) 2018
DOI: 10.1109/iccke.2018.8566571
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Brain Tumor Classification via Convolutional Neural Network and Extreme Learning Machines

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
76
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 158 publications
(76 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
76
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Other problems are feature redundancy, having noises and irrelevant data, which cause many troubles in prediction. Studies in [4][5][6][7] took advantage from ELM features.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Other problems are feature redundancy, having noises and irrelevant data, which cause many troubles in prediction. Studies in [4][5][6][7] took advantage from ELM features.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…ELM over performed other classification algorithms in some applications [5]. In [5] authors presented a method for classification of three types of brain tumors (i.e., meningioma, glioma, and pituitary tumor) to do so Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) with four convolution layers, four pooling layers and one fully connected layer was used for feature extraction. Then Kernel based ELM was used for classify these features and CNN-KELM had promising…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Proposed model performance metrics, accuracy and loss history of cropped images (a1,a2,a3) holdout validation (b1,b2,b3) 10-fold cross validation(image-level) (c1,c2,c3) stratified 10-fold cross validation (image-level) (d1,d2,d3) group 10fold cross validation ( patient-level) Figure 8. Proposed model performance metrics, accuracy and loss history of uncropped images (a1,a2,a3) holdout validation (b1,b2,b3) 10-fold cross validation(image-level) (c1,c2,c3) stratified 10-fold cross validation (image-level) (d1,d2,d3) group 10fold cross validation ( patient-level) [3] 86.56 ----Phaye et al [17] 95.03 ----Sultan et al [21] 96.13 96.06 94.43 --Gumaei et al [22] 92.16 ----Pashaei et al [25] 93 This section presents the comparison of the best performed transferred DCNN models with existing state-of-the-art works on the same dataset for brain tumor classification. To compare our findings with those of previous studies, we selected only those papers that built a neural network based on DCNN, used whole images as classification inputs and checked their networks using holdout and k-fold cross validation methods, as shown in Table 4.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Pashaei et al, [22] developed an architecture based on CNN for features extraction. They also designed a 5 layered architecture having all layers as learnable layers with customized 3 × 3 layered setup.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%