ArticlePeerJ. Computer science2024
Enhancing brain tumor diagnosis: an optimized CNN hyperparameter model for improved accuracy and reliability.
Article in PeerJ. Computer science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- A contrastive learning framework with adaptive feature fusion for brain tumor classification.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Deep Learning for Brain Tumour Analysis: A Systematic Review of CNN-Transformer Hybrids in Multimodal Imaging.International journal of biomedical imaging · 2026Review
- XcepFusion for brain tumor detection using a hybrid transfer learning framework with layer pruning and freezing.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Challenges and Advances in Classifying Brain Tumors: An Overview of Machine, Deep Learning, and Hybrid Approaches with Future Perspectives in Medical Imaging.Current medical imaging · 2025Review
- Brain Tumor Detection and Classification Using an Optimized Convolutional Neural Network.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hyperparameter tuning plays a pivotal role in the accuracy and reliability of convolutional neural network (CNN) models used in brain tumor diagnosis. These hyperparameters exert control over various aspects of the neural network, encompassing feature extraction, spatial resolution, non-linear mapping, convergence speed, and model complexity. We propose a meticulously refined CNN hyperparameter model designed to optimize critical parameters, including filter number and size, stride padding, pooling techniques, activation functions, learning rate, batch size, and the number of layers. Our approach leverages two publicly available brain tumor MRI datasets for research purposes. The first dataset comprises a total of 7,023 human brain images, categorized into four classes: glioma, meningioma, no tumor, and pituitary. The second dataset contains 253 images classified as "yes" and "no." Our approach delivers exceptional results, demonstrating an average 94.25% precision, recall, and F1-score with 96% accuracy for dataset 1, while an average 87.5% precision, recall, and F1-score, with accuracy of 88% for dataset 2. To affirm the robustness of our findings, we perform a comprehensive comparison with existing techniques, revealing that our method consistently outperforms these approaches. By systematically fine-tuning these critical hyperparameters, our model not only enhances its performance but also bolsters its generalization capabilities. This optimized CNN model provides medical experts with a more precise and efficient tool for supporting their decision-making processes in brain tumor diagnosis.
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.