ArticleVisual computing for industry, biomedicine, and art2022
Comparative analysis of proficiencies of various textures and geometric features in breast mass classification using k-nearest neighbor.
Article in Visual computing for industry, biomedicine, and art, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- ViT-FuseNet: Same-Patient MRI-Pathology Feature Fusion for Multimodal Breast Cancer Diagnosis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- DRFC: An efficient cloud-based feature reduction and clustering algorithm for agricultural product and remote-sensing imagery.PloS one · 2026Article
- Preoperative stratification of Ki-67 proliferation index in intrahepatic mass-forming cholangiocarcinoma via tumor-halo radiomic phenotyping on biparametric MRI: a multicenter diagnostic model.BMC medical imaging · 2025Article
- Lightweight Statistical and Texture Feature Approach for Breast Thermogram Analysis.Journal of imaging · 2025Article
- Breast Lesion Detection Using Weakly Dependent Customized Features and Machine Learning Models with Explainable Artificial Intelligence.Journal of imaging · 2025Article
- Detection of Masses in Mammogram Images Based on the Enhanced RetinaNet Network With INbreast Dataset.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2025Article
- A Short Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System-Based Description for Classification of Breast Mass Grade.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- An Enhanced LightGBM-Based Breast Cancer Detection Technique Using Mammography Images.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- A novel fusion framework of deep bottleneck residual convolutional neural network for breast cancer classification from mammogram images.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- An optimized model based on adaptive convolutional neural network and grey wolf algorithm for breast cancer diagnosis.PloS one · 2024Article
- Adapting the pre-trained convolutional neural networks to improve the anomaly detection and classification in mammographic images.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- A Machine Learning Approach to Assess Patients with Deep Neck Infection Progression to Descending Mediastinitis: Preliminary Results.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Deep Learning Artificial Intelligence to Predict the Need for Tracheostomy in Patients of Deep Neck Infection Based on Clinical and Computed Tomography Findings-Preliminary Data and a Pilot Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Review
- The Role of Different Retinal Imaging Modalities in Predicting Progression of Diabetic Retinopathy: A Survey.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper introduces a comparative analysis of the proficiencies of various textures and geometric features in the diagnosis of breast masses on mammograms. An improved machine learning-based framework was developed for this study. The proposed system was tested using 106 full field digital mammography images from the INbreast dataset, containing a total of 115 breast mass lesions. The proficiencies of individual and various combinations of computed textures and geometric features were investigated by evaluating their contributions towards attaining higher classification accuracies. Four state-of-the-art filter-based feature selection algorithms (Relief-F, Pearson correlation coefficient, neighborhood component analysis, and term variance) were employed to select the top 20 most discriminative features. The Relief-F algorithm outperformed other feature selection algorithms in terms of classification results by reporting 85.2% accuracy, 82.0% sensitivity, and 88.0% specificity. A set of nine most discriminative features were then selected, out of the earlier mentioned 20 features obtained using Relief-F, as a result of further simulations. The classification performances of six state-of-the-art machine learning classifiers, namely k-nearest neighbor (k-NN), support vector machine, decision tree, Naive Bayes, random forest, and ensemble tree, were investigated, and the obtained results revealed that the best classification results (accuracy = 90.4%, sensitivity = 92.0%, specificity = 88.0%) were obtained for the k-NN classifier with the number of neighbors having k = 5 and squared inverse distance weight. The key findings include the identification of the nine most discriminative features, that is, FD26 (Fourier Descriptor), Euler number, solidity, mean, FD14, FD13, periodicity, skewness, and contrast out of a pool of 125 texture and geometric features. The proposed results revealed that the selected nine features can be used for the classification of breast masses in mammograms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.