2017 10th International Congress on Image and Signal Processing, BioMedical Engineering and Informatics (CISP-BMEI) 2017
DOI: 10.1109/cisp-bmei.2017.8302196
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Positive and negative HEp-2 image classification fusing global and local features

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(5 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…While, from the comparison in accuracy it is verified that our method turns out to be the second best. However, it should be noted that while Zhou et al [34] aimed to maximize accuracy, the AUC was maximized in this work. For a more direct comparison with other methods that based their optimization on accuracy, we repeated the analysis using the latter index as a figure of merit, obtaining for the best configuration (also, this time with the SqueezeNet network), the result of 94.32% accuracy and an AUC equal to 98.34%.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 90%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…While, from the comparison in accuracy it is verified that our method turns out to be the second best. However, it should be noted that while Zhou et al [34] aimed to maximize accuracy, the AUC was maximized in this work. For a more direct comparison with other methods that based their optimization on accuracy, we repeated the analysis using the latter index as a figure of merit, obtaining for the best configuration (also, this time with the SqueezeNet network), the result of 94.32% accuracy and an AUC equal to 98.34%.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 90%
“…The best configuration analyzed was compared with other state-of-the-art methods demonstrating an excellent ability to classify the fluorescence intensity in HEp-2 images. Unfortunately, in [34] a private database was used, so a more direct comparison on the same data is not possible. The difference in accuracy between our method and that of Zhou et al, even after optimization in accuracy, is still significant.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations