Involvement of Machine Learning for Breast Cancer Image Classification: A Survey

Nahid, Abdullah-Al; Kong, Yinan

doi:https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/3781951

Computational and Mathematical Methods in Medicine

On this page

Abstract Introduction Conclusion Conflicts of Interest References Copyright Related Articles

Review Article | Open Access

Volume 2017 | Article ID 3781951 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/3781951

Involvement of Machine Learning for Breast Cancer Image Classification: A Survey

Abdullah-Al Nahid¹and Yinan Kong¹

Academic Editor: Po-Hsiang Tsui

Received29 Aug 2017

Accepted26 Oct 2017

Published31 Dec 2017

Abstract

Breast cancer is one of the largest causes of women’s death in the world today. Advance engineering of natural image classification techniques and Artificial Intelligence methods has largely been used for the breast-image classification task. The involvement of digital image classification allows the doctor and the physicians a second opinion, and it saves the doctors’ and physicians’ time. Despite the various publications on breast image classification, very few review papers are available which provide a detailed description of breast cancer image classification techniques, feature extraction and selection procedures, classification measuring parameterizations, and image classification findings. We have put a special emphasis on the Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) method for breast image classification. Along with the CNN method we have also described the involvement of the conventional Neural Network (NN), Logic Based classifiers such as the Random Forest (RF) algorithm, Support Vector Machines (SVM), Bayesian methods, and a few of the semisupervised and unsupervised methods which have been used for breast image classification.

1. Introduction

The cell of the body maintains a cycle of regeneration processes. The balanced growth and death rate of the cells normally maintain the natural working mechanism of the body, but this is not always the case. Sometimes an abnormal situation occurs, where a few cells may start growing aberrantly. This abnormal growth of cells creates cancer, which can start from any part of the body and be distributed to any other part. Different types of cancer can be formed in human body; among them breast cancer creates a serious health concern. Due to the anatomy of the human body, women are more vulnerable to breast cancer than men. Among the different reasons for breast cancer, age, family history, breast density, obesity, and alcohol intake are reasons for breast cancer.

Statistics reveal that in the recent past the situation has become worse. As a case study, Figure 1 shows the breast cancer situation in Australia for the last 12 years. This figure also shows the number of new males and females to start suffering from breast cancer. In 2007, the number of new cases for breast cancer was 12775, while the expected number of new cancer patients in 2018 will be 18235. Statistics show that, in the last decade, the number of new cancer disease patients increased every year at an alarming rate.

Figure 2 shows the number of males and females facing death due to breast cancer. It is predicted that in 2018 around 3156 people will face death; among them 3128 will be women which is almost 99.11% of the overall deaths due to breast cancer.

Women’s breasts are constructed by lobules, ducts, nipples, and fatty tissues. Milk is created in lobules and carried towards nipple by ducts. Normally epithelial tumors grow inside lobules as well as ducts and later form cancer inside the breast [1]. Once the cancer has started it also spreads to other parts of the body. Figure 3 shows the internal construction from a breast image.

Breast cancer tumors can be categorized into two broad scenarios.

(i) Benign (Noncancerous). Benign cases are considered as noncancerous, that is, non-life-threatening. But on a few occasions it could turn into a cancer status. An immune system known as “sac” normally segregates benign tumors from other cells and can be easily removed from the body.

(ii) Malignant (Cancerous). Malignant cancer starts from an abnormal cell growth and might rapidly spread or invade nearby tissue. Normally the nuclei of the malignant tissue are much bigger than in normal tissue, which can be life-threatening in future stages.

Cancer is always a life-threatening disease. Proper treatment of cancer saves people’s lives. Identification of the normal, benign, and malignant tissues is a very important step for further treatment of cancer. For the identification of benign and malignant conditions, imaging of the targeted area of the body helps the doctor and the physician in further diagnosis. With the advanced modern photography techniques, the image of the targeted part of the body can be captured more reliably. Based on the penetration of the skin and damage of the tissue medical photography techniques can be classified into two groups.

(i) Noninvasive. (a) Ultrasound: this photography technique uses similar techniques to SOund Navigation And Ranging (SONAR) which operates in the very-high-frequency domain and records the echos of that frequency, invented by Karl Theodore Dussik [2]. An ultrasound image machine contains a Central Processing Unit (CPU), transducer, a display unit, and a few other peripheral devices. This device is capable of capturing both 2D and 3D images. Ultrasound techniques do not have any side-effects, with some exceptions like production of heat bubbles around the targeted tissue. (b) X-ray: X-rays utilize electromagnetic radiation, invented by Wilhelm Conrad Roentgen in 1895. The mammogram is a special kind of X-ray (low-dose) imaging technique which is used to capture a detailed image of the breast [3]. X-rays sometimes increase the hydrogen peroxide level of the blood, which may cause cell damage. Sometimes X-rays may change the base of DNA. (c) Computer Aided Tomography (CAT): CAT, or in short CT imaging, is advanced engineering of X-ray imaging techniques, where the X-ray images are taken at different angles. The CT imaging technique was invented in 1970 and has been mostly used for three-dimensional imaging. (d) Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI): MRI is a noninvasive imaging technique which produces a 3D image of the body, invented by Professor Sir Peter Marsfield, and this method utilizes both a magnetic field as well as radio waves to capture the images [4]. MRI techniques take longer to capture images, which may create discomfort for the user. Extra cautions need to be addressed to patients who may have implanted extra metal.

(ii) Invasive. (a) Histopathological images (biopsy imaging): histopathology is the microscopic investigation of a tissue. For histopathological investigation, a patient needs to go through a number of surgical steps. The photographs taken from the histopathological tissue provide histopathological images (see Figure 4).

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

2. Breast Image Classification

Various algorithms and investigation methods have been used by researchers to investigate breast images from different perspectives depending on the demand of the disease, the status of the disease, and the quality of the images. Among the different tasks, for breast image classification, machine learning (ML) and the Artificial Intelligence (AI) are heavily utilized. A general breast image classifier consists of four stages (see Figure 5):(i)Selection of a breast database(ii)Feature extraction and selection(iii)Classifier model(iv)Performance measuring parameter(v)Classifier output.

Figure 5 shows a very basic breast image classifier model.

2.1. Available Breast Image Databases

Doctors and physicians are heavily reliant on the ultrasound, MRI, X-ray, and so forth images to find the breast cancer present status. However, to ease the doctors’ work, some research groups are investigating how to use computers more reliably for breast cancer diagnostics. To make a reliable decision about the cancer outcome, researchers always base their investigation on some well-established image database. Various organizations have introduced sets of images databases which are available to researchers for further investigation. Table 1 gives a few of the available image databases, with some specifications.

The image formats of the different databases are different. Few of the images contained images in JPEG format and few databases contained DICOM-format data. Here the MIAS, DDSM, and Inbreast databases contain mammogram images. According to the Springer (http://www.springer.com), Elsevier (https://www.elsevier.com), and IEEE (http://www.ieeexplore.ieee.org) web sites, researchers have mostly utilized the MIAS and DDSM databases for the breast image classification research. The number of conference papers published for the DDSM and MIAS databases is 110 and 168, respectively, with 82 journal papers published on DDSM databases and 136 journal papers published using the MIAS database. We have verified these statistics on both Scopus (https://www.scopus.com) and the Web of Science database (http://www.webofknowledge.com). Figure 6 shows the number of published breast image classification papers based on the MIAS and DDSM database from the years 2000 to 2017.

Histopathological images provide valuable information and are being intensively investigated by doctors for finding the current situation of the patient. The TCGA-BRCA and BreakHis databases contain histopathological images. Research has been performed in a few experiments on this database too. Among these two databases, BreakHis is the most recent histopathological image database, containing a total of 7909 images which have been collected from 82 patients [6]. So far around twenty research papers have been published based on this database.

2.2. Feature Extraction and Selection

An important step of the image classification is extracting the features from the images. In the conventional image classification task, features are crafted locally using some specific rules and criteria. However, the-state-of-the-art Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) techniques generally extract the features globally using kernels and these Global Features have been used for image classification. Among the local features, texture, detector, and statistical are being accepted as important features for breast image classification. Texture features actually represent the low-level feature information of an image, which provides more detailed information of an image that might be possible from histogram information alone. More specifically, texture features provide the structural and dimensional information of the color as well as the intensity of the image. Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) is a mammography image assessment technique, containing 6 categories normally assigned by the radiologist. Feature detector actually provides information whether the particular feature is available in the image or not. Structural features provide information about the features structure and orientation such as the area, Convex Hull, and centroid. This kind of information gives more detailed information about the features. In a cancer image, it can provide the area of the nucleus or the centroid of the mass. Mean, Median, and Standard Deviation always provide some important information on the dataset and their distribution. This kind of features has been categorized as statistical features. The total hierarchy of the image feature extraction is resented in Figure 7. Tables 2 and 3 further summarize the local features in detail.

Features which are extracted for classification do not always carry the same importance. Some features may even contribute to degrading the classifier performance. Prioritization of the feature set can reduce the classifier model complexity and so it can reduce the computational time. Feature set selection and prioritization can be classified into three broad categories:(i)Filter: the filter method selects features without evaluating any classifier algorithm.(ii)Wrapper: the wrapper method selects the feature set based on the evaluation performance of a particular classifier.(iii)Embedded: the embedded method takes advantage of the filter and wrapper methods for classifier construction.

Figure 8 shows a generalized feature selection method where we have further classified the filter method into Fisher Score, Mutual Information, Relief, and chi square methods. The embedded method has been classified into Bridge Regularization, Lasso, and Adaptive Lasso methods, while the wrapper method has been classified to recursive feature selection and sequential feature selection method.

2.3. Classifier Model

Based on the learning point of view, breast image classification techniques can be categorized into the following three classes [41]:(i)Supervised(ii)Unsupervised(iii)Semisupervised.

These three classes can be split into Deep Neural Network (DNN) and conventional classifier (without DNN) and to some further classes as in Table 4.

2.4. Performance Measuring Parameter

A Confusion Matrix is a two-dimensional table which is used to a give a visual perception of classification experiments [54]. The th position of the confusion table indicates the number of times that the th object is classified as the th object. The diagonal of this matrix indicates the number of times the objects are correctly classified. Figure 9 shows a graphical representation of a Confusion Matrix for the binary classification case.

Among the different classification performance properties, this matrix will provide following parameters:(i)Recall is defined as (ii)Precision is defined as (iii)Specificity is defined as (iv)Accuracy is defined as (v)F-1 score is defined as (vi)Matthew Correlation Coefficient (MCC): MCC is a performance parameter of a binary classifier, in the range 1 to +. If the MCC values trend more towards , the classifier gives a more accurate classifier and the opposite condition will occur if the value of the MCC trend towards the −1. MCC can be defined as

3. Performance of Different Classifier Model on Breast Images Dataset

Based on Supervised, Semisupervised, and Unsupervised methods different research groups have been performed classification operation on different image database. In this section we have summarized few of the works of breast image classification.

3.1. Performance Based on Supervised Learning

In supervised learning, a general hypothesis is established based on externally supplied instances to produce future prediction. For the supervised classification task, features are extracted or automatically crafted from the available dataset and each sample is mapped to a dedicated class. With the help of the features and their levels a hypothesis is created. Based on the hypothesis unknown data are classified [55].

Figure 10 represents an overall supervised classifier architecture. In general, the whole dataset is split into training and testing parts. To validate the data, some time data are also split into a validation part as well. After the data splitting the most important part is to find out the appropriate features to classify the data with the utmost Accuracy. Finding the features can be classified into two categories, locally and globally crafted. Locally crafted means that this method requires a hand-held exercise to find out the features, whereas globally crafted means that a kernel method has been introduced for the feature extraction. Handcrafted features can be prioritized, whereas Global Feature selection does not have this luxury.

3.1.1. Conventional Neural Network

The Neural Network (NN) concept comes from the working principle of the human brain. A biological neuron consists of the following four parts:(i)Dendrites(ii)Nuclease(iii)Cell body(iv)Axon.

Dendrites collect signals and axons carry the signal to the next dendrite after processing by the cell body as shown in Figure 11. Using the neuron working principle, the perceptron model was proposed by Rosenblatt in 1957 [56]. A single-layer perceptron linearly combines the input signal and gives a decision based on a threshold function. Based on the working principle and with some advanced mechanism and engineering, NN methods have established a strong footprint in many problem-solving issues. Figure 12 shows the basic working principle of NN techniques.

In the NN model the input data is first multiplied by the weight data and then the output is calculated using

Function is known as the activation function. This function can be any threshold value or Sigmoid or hyperbolic and so forth. In the early stages, feed-forward Neural Network techniques were introduced [57]; lately the backpropagation method has been invented to utilize the error information to improve the system performance [58, 59].

The history of breast image classification by NN is a long one. To the best of my knowledge a lot of the pioneer work was performed by Dawson et al. in 1991 [60]. Since then, NN has been utilized as one of the strong tools for breast image classification. We have summarized some of the work related to NN and breast image classification in Tables 5, 6, and 7.

3.1.2. Deep Neural Network

Deep Neural Network (DNN) is a state-of-the-art concept where conventional NN techniques have been utilized with advanced engineering. It is found that conventional NNs have difficulties in solving complex problems, whereas DNNs solve them with utmost Precision. However DNNs suffer from more time and computational complexity than the conventional NN.(i)Convolutional Neural Network (CNN)(ii)Deep Belief Network (DBN)(iii)Generative Adverbial Network (GAN)(iv)Recurrent Neural Network (RNN)

Convolutional Neural Network. A CNN model is the combination of a few intermediate mathematical structures. This intermediate mathematical structure creates or helps to create different layers:

(i) Convolutional Layer. Among all the other layers, the convolutional layer is considered as the most important part for a CNN model and can be considered as the backbone of the model. A kernel of size is scanned through the input data for the convolutional operation which ensures the local connectivity and weight sharing property.

(ii) Stride and Padding. In the convolutional operation, a filter scans through the input matrices. In each step how much position a kernel filter moves through the matrix is known as the stride. By default stride keeps to 1. With inappropriate selection of the stride the model can lose the border information. To overcome this issue the model utilizes extra rows and columns at the end of the matrices, and these added rows and columns contain all 0s. This adding of extra rows and columns which contain only zero value is known as zero padding.

(iii) Nonlinear Operation. The output of each of the kernel operations is passed through a rectifier function such as Rectified Linear Unit (ReLU), Leaky-ReLU, TanH, and Sigmoid. The Sigmoid function can be defined as and the tanh function can be defined asHowever the most effective rectifier is ReLU. The ReLU method converts all the information into zero if it is less than or equal to zero and passes all the other data as is shown in Figure 13Another important nonlinear function is Leaky-RelU where is predetermined parameter which can be varied to give a better model.

(iv) Subsampling. Subsampling is the procedure of reducing the dimensionality of each of the feature maps of a particular layer; this operation is also known as a pooling operation. Actually it reduces the amount of feature information from the overall data. By doing so, it reduces the overall computational complexity of the model. To do this patch units are utilized. The two most popular pooling methods are(a) Max-Pooling(b) Average Pooling.

In Max-Pooling, only the maximum values within a particular kernel size are selected for further calculation. Consider an example of a 16 × 16 image as shown in Figure 14. A 2 by 2 kernel is applied to the whole image, 4 blocks in total, and produces a 4 × 4 output image. For each block of four values, we have selected the maximum. For instance, from blocks one, two, three, and four, maximum values 4, 40, 13, and 8 are selected, respectively, as they are the maximum in that block. For the Average Pooling operation, each kernel gives the output as average.

(a)

(b)

(v) Dropout. Regularization of the weight can reduce the outfitting problem. Randomly removing some neurons can regularize the overfilling problem. The technique of randomly removing neurons from the network is known as dropout.

(vi) Soft-Max Layer. This layer contains normalized exponential functions to calculate the loss function for the data classification.

Figure 15 shows a generalized CNN model for the image classification. All the neurons of the most immediate layer of a fully connected layer are completely connected with the fully connected layer, like a conventional Neural Network. Let represent the th feature map at the layer . The th feature map at the layer can be represented aswhere represents the number of feature maps at the th layer, represents the kernel function, and represents the bias at , where performs a nonlinear function operation. The layer before the Soft-Max Layer can be represented asAs we are working on a binary classification, the Soft-Max regression normalized output can be represented asLet represent Benign class and represent the Malignant class. The cross-entropy loss of the above function can be calculated as

Whichever group experiences a large loss value, the model will consider the other group as predicted class.

A difficult part of working on DNN is that it requires a specialized software package for the data analysis. Few research groups have been working on how effectively data can be analyzed by DNN from different perspectives and the demand. Table 8 summarizes some of the software which is available for DNN analysis.

The history of the CNN and its use for biomedical image analysis is a long one. Fukushima first introduced a CNN named “necognitron” which has the ability to recognize stimulus patterns with a few shifting variances [113]. To the best of our knowledge, Wu et al. first classified a set of mammogram images into malignant and benign classes using a CNN model [78]. In their proposed model they only utilized one hidden layer. After that, in 1996 Sahiner et al. utilized CNN model to classify mass and normal breast tissue and achieved ROC scores of 0.87 [79]. In 2002, Lo et al. utilized a Multiple Circular Path CNN (MCPCNN) for tumor identification from mammogram images and obtained ROC scores of around 0.89. After an absence of investigation of the CNN model, this model regained its momentum after the work of Krizhevsky et al. [114]. Their proposed model is known as AlexNet. After this work a revolutionary change has been achieved in the image classification and analysis field. As an advanced engineering of the AlexNet, the paper titled “Going Deeper with Convolutions” by Szegedy [115] introduced the GoogleNet model. This model contains a much deeper network than AlexNet. Sequentially ResNet [116], Inception [117], Inception-v4, Inception-ResNet [118], and a few other models have recently been introduced.

Later, directly or with some advanced modification, these DNN models have been adapted for biomedical image analysis. In 2015, Fonseca et al. [81] classified breast density using CNN techniques. CNN requires a sufficient amount of data to train the system. It is always very difficult to find a sufficient amount of medical data for training a CNN model. A pretrained CNN model with some fine tuning can be used rather than create a model from scratch [119]. The authors of [119] did not perform their experiments on a breast cancer image dataset; however they have performed their experiments on three different medical datasets with layer-wise training and claimed that “retrained CNN along with adequate training can provide better or at least the same amount of performance.”

The Deep Belief Network (DBN) is another branch of the Deep Neural Network, which mainly consists of Restricted Boltzmann Machine (RBM) techniques. The DBN method was first utilized for supervised image classification by Liu et al. [120]. After that, Abdel-Zaher and Eldeib utilized the DBN method for breast image classification [121]. This field is still not fully explored for breast image classification yet. Zhang et al. utilized both RBM and Point-Wise Gated RBM (PRBM) for shear-wave electrography image classification where the dataset contains 227 images [97]. Their achieved classification Accuracy, Sensitivity, and Specificity are 93.40%, 88.60%, and 97.10%, respectively. Tables 9, 10, and 11 have summarized the most recent work for breast image classification along with some pioneer work on CNN.

3.1.3. Logic Based Algorithm

A Logic Based algorithm is a very popular and effective classification method which follows the tree structure principle and logical argument as shown in Figure 16. This algorithm classifies instances based on the feature’s values. Along with other criteria, a decision-tree based algorithm contains the following features:(i)Root node: a root node contains no incoming node, and it may or may not contain any outgoing edge(ii)Splitting: splitting is the process of subdividing a set of cases into a particular group. Normally the following criteria are maintained for the splitting:(a)information gain,(b)Gini index,(c)chi squared(iii)Decision node(iv)Leaf/terminal node: this kind of node has exactly one incoming edge and no outgoing edge. The tree always terminates here with a decision(v)Pruning: pruning is a process of removing subtrees from the tree. Pruning performs to reduce the overfitting problem. Two kinds of pruning techniques are available:(a)prepruning,(b)postpruning.

Among all the tree based algorithms, Iterative Dichotomiser 3 (ID3) can be considered as a pioneer, proposed by Quinlan [149]. The problem of the ID3 algorithm is to find the optimal solution which is very much prone towards overfitting. To overcome the limitation of the ID3 algorithm the C4.5 algorithm has been introduced by Quinlan [150], where a pruning method has been introduced to control the overfitting problem. Pritom et al. [151] classified the Wisconsin breast dataset where they utilized 35 features. They have obtained 76.30% Accuracy, 75.10% False Positive Rate, and ROC score 0.745 when they ranked the features. Without ranking the features they obtained 73.70% Accuracy, 50.70% False Positive Rate, and ROC score value 52.80. Asri et al. [152] utilized the C4.5 algorithm for the Wisconsin database classification where they utilized 11 features and obtained 91.13% Accuracy.

Logic Based algorithms allow us to produce more than one tree and combine the decisions of those trees for an advanced result; this mechanism is known as an ensemble method. An ensemble method combines more than one classifier hypothesis together and produces more reliable results through a voting concept. Boosting and bagging are two well-known ensemble methods. Both boosting and bagging aggregate the trees. The difference is in bagging successive trees do not depend on the predecessor trees, where in the boosting method successive trees depend on the information gathered from the predecessor trees. Gradient boosting is a very popular method for data classification [153, 154]; however a state-of-the-art boosting algorithm such as “Extreme Gradient Boosting” (XGBoosting) is a very effective method for data classification [155]. Interestingly, there has not been a single paper published for breast image classification using the XGBoost algorithm. Along with the boosting method, different bagging methods are available; among them Random Forest (RF) is very popular where a large number of uncorrelated trees are aggregated together for a better prediction. Tables 12 and 13 summarize a set of papers where a Logic Based algorithm has been used for image classification.

3.1.4. Support Vector Machine (SVM)

SVM were proposed by VC (Vepnick-Cherovorenkis). This technique does not require any prior distribution knowledge for the data classification task like Bayesian classification technique. In many practical situations, the distribution of the features is not available. In such cases, SVM can be used to classify the available data into the different classes.

Consider the set of two-dimensional data plotted in Figure 17. The symbol “” represents those data which belong to Class-1 and “□” represents data which belong to Class-2. A hyperplane has been drawn which classifies the data into two classes. Interestingly, there will be “” hyperplanes available which can separate the data.

Let , where () is to be classified into two classes . Suppose that the classes and are recognized as “+1” and “−1”. Classification of this data can be writtenDuring the learning stage, the SVM finds parameters and to produce a decision function :where . As the training data are linearly separable no training data will satisfy the condition

To control the separability, we consider the following inequalities:

Sometime it is very difficult to find the perfect hyperplane which can separate the data, but if we transform the data into a higher dimension the data may be easily separable. To separate this kind of data, a kernel function can be introduced.

Kernel Methods. Assume a transformation such that it transforms the dataset into dataset where . Now train the linear SVM on the dataset to get a new classifier .

A kernel effectively computes a dot product in a higher-dimensional space . For , is an inner product of , where transforms to . Consider ; then we can define the kernel as follows:(i)Radial basis function kernel (rbf): (ii)Polynomial kernel (polynomial): .(iii)Sigmoid kernel: .(iv)Linear kernel (linear): .

The advantage of the kernel method for breast cancer image classification using an SVM was first introduced by El-Naqa et al. [156]. They classify Microcalcification clusters in mammogram images (76 images were utilized for the experiment where the total number of MCs was 1120). They utilized the SVM method along with the Gaussian kernel as well as the polynomial kernel. In 2003, Chang et al. classified a set of sonography images using SVM techniques where they consider that the image is surrounded by pickle noise [157], where the database contains 250 images. Their achieved Accuracy was 93.20%. A total of thirteen features, including shape, law, and gradient features, were utilized along with SVM and a Gaussian kernel for the mammogram image classification. They performed their operation on 193 mammogram images and achieved 83.70% sensitivity and 30.20% False Positive Rate [158]. SVM has been combined with the NN method by B. Sing et al. for ultrasound breast image classification where the database contained a total of 178 images. They performed a hybrid feature selection method to select the best features [159].

A breast ultrasound image is always very complex in nature. The Multiple Instance Learning (MIL) algorithm has been first used along with SVM for the breast image classification by [176], and their obtained Accuracy was 91.07%. The Concentric Circle BOW feature extraction method was utilized to extract the features and later the SVM method was used for breast image classification [177]. Their achieved Accuracy is 88.33% when the dimension of the features was 1000. A Bag of Features has been extracted from histopathological images (using SIFT and DCT) and using SVM for classification by Mhala and Bhandari [178]. The experiment is performed on a database which contains 361 images, where 119 images are normal, 102 images are ductal carcinoma in situ, and the rest of the images are invasive carcinoma. Their experiment achieved 100.00% classification Accuracy for ductal carcinoma in situ, 98.88% classification Accuracy for invasive carcinoma, and 100.00% classification Accuracy for normal image classification. A mammogram (DDSM) image database has been classified by Hiba et al. [179] by SVM along with the Bag of Feature method. Firstly the authors extract LBP and quantize the binary pattern information for feature extraction. Their obtained Accuracy was 91.25%.

Along with the above-mentioned work different breast image databases have been analyzed and classified using SVM. We have summarized some of the work related to SVM in Tables 14, 15, and 16.

3.1.5. Bayesian

A Bayesian classifier is a statistical method based on Bayes theorem. This method does not follow any explicit decision rule; however it depends on estimating probabilities. The Naive Bayes method can be considered one of the earlier Bayesian learning algorithms.

The Naive Bayes (NB) method works on the basis of the Bayes formula, where each of the features is considered statistically independent. Consider a dataset with samples, with each sample containing a feature vector with features [180] and belonging to a particular class . According to the NB formula, the probability of the particular class with the conditional vector is represented asApplying the chain rule The NB theorem considers all the features independently which can be represented as

The NB method is very easy to construct and very first to predict the data. This method can also utilize the kernel method. However, for a large dataset and continuous data, this method has very poor performance. NB can be classified into the following subclasses:(i)Gaussian Naive Bayes(ii)Multinomial Naive Bayes(iii)Bernoulli Naive Bayes.

One of the constraints of the NB classifier is that it considers that all the features are conditionally independent. A Bayesian Network is another Bayesian classifier which can overcome this constraint [181, 182]. The literature shows that the Bayesian classifier method is not utilized much for breast image classification. In 2003 Butler et al. used NB classifier for X-ray breast image classification [183]. They extracted features from the low-level pixels. For all feature combinations they obtained more than 90.00% Accuracy. Bayesian structural learning has been utilized for a breast lesion classifier by Fischer et al. [184]. Soria et al. [185] classify a breast cancer dataset utilizing C4.5, multilayered perceptron, and the NB algorithm using WEKA software [186]. They conclude that the NB method gives better performance than the other two methods in that particular case. They also compared their results with the Bayes classifier output. Some other research on the Bayes classifier and breast image classification has been summarized in Tables 17 and 18.

3.2. Performance Based on Unsupervised Learning

This learning algorithm does not require any prior knowledge about the target. The main goal of the unsupervised learning is to find the hidden structure and relations between the different data [187] and distribute the data into different clusters. Basically clustering is a statistical process where a set of data points is partitioned into a set of groups, known as a cluster. The -means algorithm is a clustering algorithm proposed by [188]. Interestingly, unsupervised learning can be utilized as preprocessing step too.(i) In the -means algorithm, firstly assign centroid points. Suppose that we have feature points where . The objective of the -means algorithm is to find positions , where that minimize the data points to the cluster by solving(ii) Self-Organizing Map (SOM): SOM is another popular unsupervised classifier, proposed by Kohonen et al. [189–191]. The main idea of the SOM method is to reduce the dimension of the data and represent those dimensionally reduced data by a map architecture, which provides more visual information.(iii) Fuzzy -Means Clustering (FCM): the FCM algorithm cluster databased on the value of a membership function is proposed by [192] and improved by Bezdek [193].

The history of using unsupervised learning for breast image classification is a long one. In 2000, Cahoon et al. [194] classified mammogram breast images (DDSM database) in an unsupervised manner, utilizing the -NN clustering and Fuzzy -Means (FCM) methods. Chen et al. classified a set of breast images into benign and malignant classes [164]. They utilized a SOM procedure to perform this classification operation. They collected 24 autocorrelation textural features and used a 10-fold validation method. Markey et al. utilized the SOM method for BIRADS image classification of 4435 samples [195]. Tables 19 and 20 summarize the breast image classification performance based on -means algorithm and SOM method.

3.3. Performance Based on Semisupervisor

The working principle of semisupervised learning lies in between supervised and unsupervised learning. For the semisupervised learning a few input data have an associated target and large amounts of data are not labeled [196]. It is always very difficult to collect the labeled data. Few data such as speech or information scratched from the web are difficult to label. To classify this kind of data semisupervised learning is very efficient. However lately this method has been utilized for the brats image classification too. Semisupervised learning can be classified as(i)Graph Based (GB)(ii)Semisupervised Support Vector Machine(iii)Human Semisupervised Learning.

To the best of our knowledge, Li and Yuen have utilized GB semisupervised learning for biomedical image classification [197]. The kernel trick is applied along with the semisupervised learning method for breast image classification by Li et al. [198]. They performed their experiments on the Wisconsin Prognostic Breast Cancer (WPBC) dataset for the breast image classification. Ngadi et al. utilized both the SKDA (Supervised Kernel-Based Deterministic Annealing) and NSVC methods for mammographic image classification [199]. They performed their experiments on 961 images, where 53.60% of the images were benign and the rest of the images are malignant. Among the other utilized features they utilized BI-RADS descriptors as features. When they utilized the NSVC method they also utilized RBF, polynomial, and linear kernel. They found that the best Accuracy of 99.27% was achieved when they utilized linear kernels. Few studies have performed the breast image classification by semisupervised learning, as summarized in Tables 21 and 22.

4. Conclusion

Breast cancer is a serious threat to women throughout the world and is responsible for increasing the female mortality rate. The improvement of the current situation with breast cancer is a big concern and can be achieved by proper investigation, diagnosis, and appropriate patient and clinical management. Identification of breast cancer in the earlier stages and a regular check of the cancer can save many lives. The status of cancer changes with time, as the appearance, distribution, and structural geometry of the cells are changing on a particular time basis because of the chemical changes which are always going on inside the cell. The changing structure of cells can be detected by analysing biomedical images which can be obtained by mammogram, MRI, and so forth techniques. However these images are complex in nature and require expert knowledge to perfectly analyze malignancy. Due to the nontrivial nature of the images the physician sometimes makes a decision which might contradict others. However computer-aided-diagnosis techniques emphasising the machine learning can glean a significant amount of information from the images and provide a decision based on the gained information, such as cancer identification, by classifying the images.

The contribution of machine learning techniques to image classification is a long story. Using some advanced engineering techniques with some modifications, the existing machine learning based image classification techniques have been used for biomedical image classification, specially for breast image classification and segmentation. A few branches of the machine learning based image classifier are available such as Deep Neural Network, Logic Based, and SVM. Except for deep-learning, a machine learning-based classifier largely depends on handcrafted feature extraction techniques such as statistical and structural information that depend on various mathematical formulations and theorize where they gain object-specific information. They are further utilized as an input for an image classifier such as SVM and Logic Based, for the image classification.

This investigation finds that most of the conventional classifiers depend on prerequisite local feature extraction. The nature of cancer is always changing, so the dependencies on a set of local features will not provide good results on a new dataset. However the state-of-the art Deep Neural Networks, specially CNN, have recently advanced biomedical image classification due to the Global Feature extraction capabilities. As the core of the CNN model is the kernel, which gives this model the luxury of working with the Global Features, these globally extracted features allow the CNN model to extract more hidden structure from the images. This allows some exceptional results for breast cancer image classification. As the CNN model is based on the Global Features, this kind of classifier model should be easy to adapt to a new dataset.

This paper also finds that the malignancy information is concentrated in the particular area defined as ROI. Utilizing only the ROI portions, information gathered from the segmented part of the data can improve the performance substantially. The recent development of the Deep Neural Network can also be utilized for finding the ROI and segmenting the data, which can be further utilized for the image classification.

For breast cancer patient care, the machine learning techniques and tools have been a tremendous success so far, and this success has gained an extra impetus with the involvement of deep-learning techniques. However the main difficulty of handling the current deep-learning based machine learning classifier is its computational complexity, which is much higher than for the traditional method. The current research is focused on the development of the light DNN model so that both the computational and timing complexities can be reduced. Another difficulty of using the DNN based cancer image classifier is that it requires a large amount of training data. However the reinforcement of learning techniques and data augmentation has been largely adapted with the current CNN model, which can provide reliable outcomes. Our research finds that the current trend of machine learning is largely towards deep-learning techniques. Among a few other implications, the appropriate tools for designing the overall deep-learning model was the initial obligation for utilizing deep-learning based machine learning techniques. However some reliable software has been introduced which can be utilized for breast image classification. Initially it was difficult to implement a DNN based architecture in simpler devices; however due to cloud-computer based Artificial Intelligence techniques this issue has been overcome and DNN has already been integrated with electronic devices such as mobile phones. In future combining the DNN network with the other learning techniques can provide more-positive predictions about breast cancer.

Due to the tremendous concern about breast cancer, many research contributions have been published so far. It is quite difficult to summarize all the research work related to breast cancer image classification based on machine learning techniques in a single research article. However this paper has attempted to provide a holistic approach to the breast cancer image classification procedure which summarizes the available breast dataset, generalized image classification techniques, feature extraction and reduction techniques, performance measuring criteria, and state-of-the-art findings.

In a nutshell, the involvement of machine learning for breast image classification allows doctors and physicians to take a second opinion, and it provides satisfaction to and raises the confidence level of the patient. There is also a scarcity of expert people who can provide the appropriate opinion about the disease. Sometimes the patient might need to spend a long time waiting due to the lack of expert people. In this particular scenario the machine learning based diagnostic system can help the patient to receive the timely feedback about the disease which can improve the patient-management scenario.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.

References

J. E. Skandalakis, Embryology and Anatomy of the Breast, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany, 2009.
M. A. Shampo and R. A. Kyle, “Karl theodore dussik—pioneer in ultrasound,” Mayo Clinic proceedings, vol. 70, no. 12, p. 1136, 1995.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
O. H. Karatas and E. Toy, “Three-dimensional imaging techniques: a literature review,” European Journal of Dentistry, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 132–140, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Lakrimi, A. M. Thomas, G. Hutton et al., “The principles and evolution of magnetic resonance imaging,” Journal of Physics: Conference Series, vol. 286, no. 1, Article ID 012016, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
http://www.aihw.gov.au/acim-books/.
F. A. Spanhol, L. S. Oliveira, C. Petitjean, and L. Heutte, “Breast cancer histopathological image classification using Convolutional Neural Networks,” in Proceedings of the 2016 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks, IJCNN 2016, pp. 2560–2567, Canada, July 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. M. Haralick, “Statistical and structural approaches to texture,” Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 67, no. 5, pp. 786–804, 1979.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Tamura, S. Mori, and T. Yamawaki, “Textural features corresponding to visual perception,” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, vol. 8, no. 6, pp. 460–473, 1978.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Lindeberg, “Feature detection with automatic scale selection,” International Journal of Computer Vision, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 79–116, 1998.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Harris and M. Stephens, “A combined corner and edge detector,” in Proceedings of the 4th Alvey Vision Conference, pp. 147–151, 1988.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. M. Smith and J. M. Brady, “SUSAN: a new approach to low level image processing,” International Journal of Computer Vision, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 45–78, 1997.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. Rosten and T. Drummond, “Fusing points and lines for high performance tracking,” in Proceedings of the 10th IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV '05), vol. 2, pp. 1508–1515, Beijing, China, October 2005.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. Rosten and T. Drummond, “Machine learning for high-speed corner detection,” Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV '06), vol. Part I, Springer-Verlag, pp. 430–443, 2006.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Lenz, “Rotation-invariant operators and scale-space filtering,” Pattern Recognition Letters, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 151–154, 1987.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Lakemond, S. Sridharan, and C. Fookes, “Hessian-based affine adaptation of salient local image features,” Journal of Mathematical Imaging and Vision, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 150–167, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | MathSciNet
T. Lindeberg, “Scale selection properties of generalized scale-space interest point detectors,” Journal of Mathematical Imaging and Vision, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 177–210, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | MathSciNet
D. G. Lowe, “Distinctive image features from scale-invariant keypoints,” International Journal of Computer Vision, vol. 60, no. 2, pp. 91–110, 2004.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
W. N. J. Hj Wan Yussof and M. S. Hitam, “Invariant Gabor-based interest points detector under geometric transformation,” Digital Signal Processing, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 190–197, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J.-M. Morel and G. Yu, “Asift: A new framework for fully affine invariant image comparison,” SIAM Journal on Imaging Sciences, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 438–469, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | MathSciNet
K. Mikolajczyk and C. Schmid, “A performance evaluation of local descriptors,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, vol. 2, pp. II-257–II-263, Madison, WI, USA, June 2003.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
B. Zhang, Y. Jiao, Z. Ma, Y. Li, and J. Zhu, “An efficient image matching method using Speed Up Robust Features,” in Proceedings of the 11th IEEE International Conference on Mechatronics and Automation, IEEE ICMA 2014, pp. 553–558, China, August 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
B. Karasfi, T. S. Hong, A. Jalalian, and D. Nakhaeinia, “Speedup Robust Features based unsupervised place recognition for assistive mobile robot,” in Proceedings of the 2011 International Conference on Pattern Analysis and Intelligent Robotics, ICPAIR 2011, pp. 97–102, Malaysia, June 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Bay, A. Ess, T. Tuytelaars, and L. Van Gool, “Speeded-up robust features (surf),” Computer Vision and Image Understanding, vol. 110, no. 3, pp. 346–359, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Ojala, M. Pietikäinen, and T. Mäenpää, “Multiresolution gray-scale and rotation invariant texture classification with local binary patterns,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 24, no. 7, pp. 971–987, 2002.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Ojala, M. Pietikäinen, and T. Mäenpää, “A generalized local binary pattern operator for multiresolution gray scale and rotation invariant texture classification,” in Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Advances in Pattern Recognition (ICAPR ’01), pp. 397–406, Springer-Verlag, London, UK, 2001.
View at: Google Scholar
T. Ahonen, J. Matas, C. He, and M. Pietikäinen, Rotation Invariant Image Description with Local Binary Pattern Histogram Fourier Features, pp. 61–70, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site
G. Zhao and M. Pietikäinen, “Dynamic texture recognition using local binary patterns with an application to facial expressions,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 915–928, 2007.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Calonder, V. Lepetit, M. Özuysal, T. Trzcinski, C. Strecha, and P. Fua, “BRIEF: computing a local binary descriptor very fast,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 34, no. 7, pp. 1281–1298, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Gong, S. Li, and Y. Xiang, “Face recognition using the Weber Local Descriptor,” in Proceedings of the 1st Asian Conference on Pattern Recognition, ACPR 2011, pp. 589–592, China, November 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Chen, S. Shan, C. He et al., “WLD: A robust local image descriptor,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 32, no. 9, pp. 1705–1720, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. H. Davarpanah, F. Khalid, L. Nurliyana Abdullah, and M. Golchin, “A texture descriptor: BackGround Local Binary Pattern (BGLBP),” Multimedia Tools and Applications, vol. 75, no. 11, pp. 6549–6568, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Heikkilä, M. Pietikäinen, and C. Schmid, Description of Interest Regions with Center-Symmetric Local Binary Patterns, pp. 58–69, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany, 2006.
View at: Publisher Site
G. Xue, L. Song, J. Sun, and M. Wu, “Hybrid center-symmetric local pattern for dynamic background subtraction,” in Proceedings of the 2011 12th IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo (ICME '11), pp. 1–6, July 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Wu, N. Liu, X. Luo, J. Su, and L. Chen, “Real-time background subtraction-based video surveillance of people by integrating local texture patterns,” Signal, Image and Video Processing, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 665–676, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Liu, P. Fieguth, G. Zhao, M. Pietikäinen, and D. Hu, “Extended local binary patterns for face recognition,” Information Sciences, vol. 358-359, pp. 56–72, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Mäenpää and M. Pietikäinen, “Classification with color and texture: jointly or separately?” Pattern Recognition, vol. 37, no. 8, pp. 1629–1640, 2004.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Xue, J. Sun, and L. Song, “Dynamic background subtraction based on spatial extended center-symmetric local binary pattern,” in Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo, ICME 2010, pp. 1050–1054, Singapore, July 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Liao, G. Zhao, V. Kellokumpu, M. Pietikäinen, and S. Z. Li, “Modeling pixel process with scale invariant local patterns for background subtraction in complex scenes,” in Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, CVPR 2010, pp. 1301–1306, USA, June 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Silva, T. Bouwmans, and C. Frélicot, “An extended center-symmetric local binary pattern for background modeling and subtraction in videos,” in Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Computer Vision Theory and Applications (VISAPP '15), vol. 1, pp. 395–402, 2015.
View at: Google Scholar
Y. Chen, L. Ling, and Q. Huang, “Classification of breast tumors in ultrasound using biclustering mining and neural network,” in Proceedings of the 9th International Congress on Image and Signal Processing, BioMedical Engineering and Informatics, CISP-BMEI 2016, pp. 1787–1791, China, October 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. B. Kotsiantis, I. D. Zaharakis, and P. E. Pintelas, “Machine learning: A review of classification and combining techniques,” Artificial Intelligence Review, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 159–190, 2006.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. T. Rajakeerthana, C. Velayutham, and K. Thangavel, Mammogram Image Classification Using Rough Neural Network, pp. 133–138, Springer India, New Delhi, Indina, 2014.
V. Lessa and M. Marengoni, Applying Artificial Neural Network for the Classification of Breast Cancer Using Infrared Thermographic Images, pp. 429–438, Springer International Publishing, Cham, Germany, 2016.
S. Wan, H.-C. Lee, X. Huang et al., “Integrated local binary pattern texture features for classification of breast tissue imaged by optical coherence microscopy,” Medical Image Analysis, vol. 38, pp. 104–116, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. M. L. de Lima, A. G. da Silva-Filho, and W. P. dos Santos, “Detection and classification of masses in mammographic images in a multi-kernel approach,” Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine, vol. 134, pp. 11–29, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Abirami, R. Harikumar, and S. Chakravarthy, “Performance analysis and detection of micro calcification in digital mammograms using wavelet features,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on Wireless Communications, Signal Processing and Networking (WiSPNET '16), pp. 2327–2331, Chennai, India, March 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. El Atlas, A. Bybi, and H. Drissi, “Features fusion for characterizing INBREAST-database masses,” in Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Electrical and Information Technologies, ICEIT 2016, pp. 374–379, Morocco, May 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Alharbi, G. Falzon, and P. Kwan, “A novel feature reduction framework for digital mammogram image classification,” in Proceedings of the 3rd IAPR Asian Conference on Pattern Recognition, ACPR 2015, pp. 221–225, Malaysia, November 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
W. Peng, R. V. Mayorga, and E. M. A. Hussein, “An automated confirmatory system for analysis of mammograms,” Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine, vol. 125, pp. 134–144, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Jalalian, S. Mashohor, R. Mahmud, B. Karasfi, M. Iqbal Saripan, and A. R. Ramli, “Computer-assisted diagnosis system for breast cancer in computed tomography laser mammography (ctlm),” Journal of Digital Imaging, pp. 1–16, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Li, X. Meng, T. Wang, Y. Tang, and Y. Yin, “Breast masses in mammography classification with local contour features,” Biomedical Engineering Online, vol. 16, no. 1, 44 pages, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D.-R. Chen, R.-F. Chang, and Y.-L. Huang, “Computer-aided diagnosis applied to US of solid breast nodules by using neural networks,” Radiology, vol. 213, no. 2, pp. 407–412, 1999.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D.-R. Chen, R.-F. Chang, Y.-L. Huang, Y.-H. Chou, C.-M. Tiu, and P.-P. Tsai, “Texture analysis of breast tumors on sonograms,” Seminars in Ultrasound, CT and MRI, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 308–316, 2000.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. D. Marom, L. Rokach, and A. Shmilovici, “Using the confusion matrix for improving ensemble classifiers,” in Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE 26th Convention of Electrical and Electronics Engineers in Israel, IEEEI 2010, pp. 555–559, Israel, November 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. B. Kotsiantis, “Supervised machine learning: a review of classification techniques,” in Proceedings of the 2007 Conference on Emerging Artificial Intelligence Applications in Computer Engineering: Real Word AI Systems with Applications in eHealth, HCI, Information Retrieval and Pervasive Technologies, pp. 3–24, 2007.
View at: Google Scholar | MathSciNet
F. Rosenblatt, The Perceptron: A Perceiving and Recognizing Automaton, Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory, Buffalo, New York, USA, 1957.
View at: MathSciNet
K. Hornik, M. Stinchcombe, and H. White, “Multilayer feedforward networks are universal approximators,” Neural Networks, vol. 2, no. 5, pp. 359–366, 1989.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. Hecht-Nielsen, “Neural networks for perception,” in ch. Theory of the Backpropagation Neural Network, vol. 2, pp. 65–93, Harcourt Brace Co, Orlando, FL, USA, 1992.
View at: Google Scholar
J. Li, J. H. Cheng, J. Y. Shi, and F. Huang, “Brief introduction of back propagation (BP) neural network algorithm and its improvement,” in Advances in Computer Science and Information Engineering—Volume 2, D. Jin and S. Lin, Eds., vol. 169 of Advances in Intelligent and Soft Computing, pp. 553–558, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Dawson, R. Austin Jr., and D. Weinberg, “Nuclear grading of breast carcinoma by image analysis: Classification by multivariate and neural network analysis,” American Journal of Clinical Pathology, vol. 95, Supplement 1, no. 4, pp. S29–S37, 1991.
View at: Google Scholar
D.-R. Chen, R.-F. Chang, W.-J. Kuo, M.-C. Chen, and Y.-L. Huang, “Diagnosis of breast tumors with sonographic texture analysis using wavelet transform and neural networks,” Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, vol. 28, no. 10, pp. 1301–1310, 2002.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. D. De S. Silva, M. G. F. Costa, W. C. De A. Pereira, and C. F. F. C. Filho, “Breast tumor classification in ultrasound images using neural networks with improved generalization methods,” in Proceedings of the 37th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC '15), pp. 6321–6325, Italy, August 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
I. Saritas, “Prediction of breast cancer using artificial neural networks,” Journal of Medical Systems, vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 2901–2907, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. López-Meléndez, L. D. Lara-Rodríguez, E. López-Olazagasti, B. Sánchez-Rinza, and E. Tepichin-Rodríguez, “BICAD: Breast image computer aided diagnosis for standard BIRADS 1 and 2 in calcifications,” in Proceedings of the 22nd Annual International Conference on Electronics, Communications and Computers, CONIELECOMP 2012, pp. 190–195, Mexico, February 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
https://github.com/BVLC/caffe.
Y. Jia, E. Shelhamer, J. Donahue et al., “Caffe: convolutional architecture for fast feature embedding,” CoRR, 2014.
View at: Google Scholar
http://torch.ch/.
http://www.vlfeat.org/matconvnet/.
A. Vedaldi and K. Lenc, “Matconvnet - convolutional neural networks for MATLAB,” CoRR, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
http://deeplearning.net/software/theano/.
J. Bergstra, O. Breuleux, F. Bastien et al., “Theano: A cpu and gpu math compiler in python,” in Proceedings of the 9th Python in Science Conference, pp. 3–10, 2010.
View at: Google Scholar
https://www.tensorflow.org/.
https://github.com/Microsoft/CNTK.
https://keras.io.
https://github.com/ml4j.
http://ceit.aut.ac.ir/keyvanrad/DeeBNet.
M. A. Keyvanrad and M. M. Homayounpour, “A brief survey on deep belief networks and introducing a new object oriented MATLAB toolbox (deebnet),” CoRR, vol. abs/1408.3264, 2014.
View at: Google Scholar
C. Y. Wu, S.-C. B. Lo, M. T. Freedman, A. Hasegawa, R. A. Zuurbier, and S. K. Mun, “Classification of microcalcifications in radiographs of pathological specimen for the diagnosis of breast cancer,” in Proceedings of the Medical Imaging, pp. 630–641, SPIE. Digital Library, Newport Beach, CA, USA, 1994.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
B. Sahiner, H.-P. Chan, N. Petrick et al., “Classification of mass and normal breast tissue: a convolution neural network classifier with spatial domain and texture images,” IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 598–610, 1996.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S.-C. B. Lo, H. Li, Y. Wang, L. Kinnard, and M. T. Freedman, “A multiple circular path convolution neural network system for detection of mammographic masses,” IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 150–158, 2002.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. Fonseca, J. Mendoza, J. Wainer et al., “Automatic breast density classification using a convolutional neural network architecture search procedure,” in Proceedings of the SPIE Medical Imaging Symposium 2015: Computer-Aided Diagnosis, vol. 9414, pp. 941428–941428–8, USA, February 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Arevalo, F. A. González, R. Ramos-Pollán, J. L. Oliveira, and M. A. Guevara Lopez, “Representation learning for mammography mass lesion classification with convolutional neural networks,” Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine, vol. 127, pp. 248–257, 2016.
View at: Google Scholar
H. Su, F. Liu, Y. Xie, F. Xing, S. Meyyappan, and L. Yang, “Region segmentation in histopathological breast cancer images using deep convolutional neural network,” in Proceedings of the 12th IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging, ISBI 2015, pp. 55–58, USA, April 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. Sharma and B. Preet, “Classification of mammogram images by using CNN classifier,” in Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Advances in Computing, Communications and Informatics, ICACCI 2016, pp. 2743–2749, India, September 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Rezaeilouyeh, A. Mollahosseini, and M. H. Mahoor, “Microscopic medical image classification framework via deep learning and shearlet transform,” Journal of Medical Imaging, vol. 3, no. 4, Article ID 044501, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Albayrak and G. Bilgin, Mitosis Detection Using Convolutional Neural Network Based Features, pp. 335–340, 2017.
Z. Jiao, X. Gao, Y. Wang, and J. Li, “A deep feature based framework for breast masses classification,” Neurocomputing, vol. 197, pp. 221–231, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Zejmo, M. Kowal, J. Korbicz, and R. Monczak, “Classification of breast cancer cytological specimen using convolutional neural network,” Journal of Physics: Conference Series, vol. 783, no. 1, Article ID 012060, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. Jiang, H. Liu, S. Yu, and Y. Xie, “Breast mass lesion classification in mammograms by transfer learning,” in Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Bioinformatics and Computational Biology (ICBCB ’17), pp. 59–62, ACM, New York, NY, USA, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Suzuki, X. Zhang, N. Homma et al., “Mass detection using deep convolutional neural network for mammographic computer-aided diagnosis,” in Proceedings of the 55th Annual Conference of the Society of Instrument and Control Engineers of Japan (SICE '16), pp. 1382–1386, Japan, September 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Qiu, Y. Wang, S. Yan et al., “An initial investigation on developing a new method to predict short-term breast cancer risk based on deep learning technology,” in Proceedings of the Medical Imaging 2016: Computer-Aided Diagnosis, SPIE. Digital Library, San Diego, California, USA, March 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. K. Samala, H.-P. Chan, L. M. Hadjiiski, K. Cha, and M. A. Helvie, “Deep-learning convolution neural network for computer-aided detection of microcalcifications in digital breast tomosynthesis,” in Proceedings of the Medical Imaging 2016: Computer-Aided Diagnosis, USA, March 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Kooi, G. Litjens, B. van Ginneken et al., “Large scale deep learning for computer aided detection of mammographic lesions,” Medical Image Analysis, vol. 35, pp. 303–312, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. J. Geras, S. Wolfson, S. G. Kim, L. Moy, and K. Cho, “High-resolution breast cancer screening with multi-view deep convolutional neural networks,” CoRR, vol. abs/1703.07047, 2017.
View at: Google Scholar
S. Beura, B. Majhi, R. Dash, and S. Roy, “Classification of mammogram using two-dimensional discrete orthonormal S-transform for breast cancer detection,” Healthcare Technology Letters, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 46–51, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Diz, G. Marreiros, and A. Freitas, Using Data Mining Techniques to Support Breast Cancer Diagnosis, Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, pp. 689–700, Springer International Publishing, Cham, Switzerland, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site
J. Zhang, J. I. Silber, and M. A. Mazurowski, “Modeling false positive error making patterns in radiology trainees for improved mammography education,” Journal of Biomedical Informatics, vol. 54, pp. 50–57, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. K. Ahmad and N. Yusoff, “Classifying breast cancer types based on fine needle aspiration biopsy data using random forest classifier,” in Proceedings of the 2013 13th International Conference on Intellient Systems Design and Applications (ISDA '13), pp. 121–125, Malaysia, December 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Paul, A. Dey, D. P. Mukherjee, J. Sivaswamy, and V. Tourani, Regenerative Random Forest with Automatic Feature Selection to Detect Mitosis in Histopathological Breast Cancer Images, vol. 9350 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 94–102, Springer International Publishing, Cham, Switzerland, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site
Z. Chen, M. Berks, S. Astley, and C. Taylor, Classification of Linear Structures in Mammograms Using Random Forests, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 153–160, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany, 2010.
Y. Zhang, B. Zhang, and W. Lu, “Breast cancer classification from histological images with multiple features and random subspace classifier ensemble,” in Proceedings of the 2011 International Symposium on Computational Models for Life Sciences (CMLS '11), vol. 1371 of AIP Conference Proceedings, pp. 19–28, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. P. Angayarkanni and N. B. Kamal, “MRI mammogram image classification using ID3 algorithm,” in Proceedings of the IET Conference on Image Processing (IPR '12), pp. 1–5, IET, London, UK, July 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. Wang, M. Dong, Z. Yang, Y. Guo, and Y. Ma, “Regions of micro-calcifications clusters detection based on new features from imbalance data in mammograms,” in Proceedings of the 2016 8th International Conference on Graphic and Image Processing (ICGIP '16), vol. 10225, pp. 102252C–102252C–6, SPIE. Digital Library, Tokyo, Japan, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. O. Tambasco Bruno, M. Z. Do Nascimento, R. P. Ramos, V. R. Batista, L. A. Neves, and A. S. Martins, “LBP operators on curvelet coefficients as an algorithm to describe texture in breast cancer tissues,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 55, pp. 329–340, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Muramatsu, T. Hara, T. Endo, and H. Fujita, “Breast mass classification on mammograms using radial local ternary patterns,” Computers in Biology and Medicine, vol. 72, pp. 43–53, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Dong, X. Lu, Y. Ma, Y. Guo, Y. Ma, and K. Wang, “An efficient approach for automated mass segmentation and classification in mammograms,” Journal of Digital Imaging, vol. 28, no. 5, pp. 613–625, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Piantadosi, R. Fusco, A. Petrillo, M. Sansone, and C. Sansone, LBP-TOP for Volume Lesion Classification in Breast DCE-MRI, pp. 647–657, Springer International Publishing, Cham, Switzerland, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | MathSciNet
B. Malik, J. Klock, J. Wiskin, and M. Lenox, “Objective breast tissue image classification using Quantitative Transmission ultrasound tomography,” Scientific Reports, vol. 6, no. 3, Article ID 38857, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R.-F. Chang, W.-J. Wu, W. K. Moon, Y.-H. Chou, and D.-R. Chen, “Support vector machines for diagnosis of breast tumors on US images,” Academic Radiology, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 189–197, 2003.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Akbay, N. G. Gençer, and G. Gençer, “CAD for detection of microcalcification and classification in Mammograms,” in Proceedings of the 2014 18th National Biomedical Engineering Meeting (BIYOMUT '14), pp. 1–4, Turkey, October 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Levman, T. Leung, P. Causer, D. Plewes, and A. L. Martel, “Classification of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance breast lesions by support vector machines,” IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, vol. 27, no. 5, pp. 688–696, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. de Oliveira Martins, E. C. da Silva, A. C. Silva, A. C. de Paiva, and M. Gattass, “Classification of Breast Masses in Mammogram Images Using Ripley’s K Function and Support Vector Machine,” in Machine Learning and Data Mining in Pattern Recognition, vol. 4571 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 784–794, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany, 2007.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. Fukushima, “Neocognitron: a self-organizing neural network model for a mechanism of pattern recognition unaffected by shift in position,” Biological Cybernetics, vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 193–202, 1980.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Krizhevsky, I. Sutskever, and G. E. Hinton, “Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural networks,” in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 25, F. Pereira, C. J. C. Burges, L. Bottou, and K. Q. Weinberger, Eds., pp. 1097–1105, Curran Associates, Inc., 2012.
View at: Google Scholar
C. Szegedy, W. Liu, Y. Jia et al., “Going deeper with convolutions,” CoRR, vol. abs/1409.4842, 2014.
View at: Google Scholar
K. He, X. Zhang, S. Ren, and J. Sun, “Deep residual learning for image recognition,” CoRR, vol. abs/1512.03385, 2015.
View at: Google Scholar
C. Szegedy, V. Vanhoucke, S. Ioffe, J. Shlens, and Z. Wojna, “Rethinking the inception architecture for computer vision,” CoRR, vol. abs/1512.00567, 2015.
View at: Google Scholar
C. Szegedy, S. Ioffe, and V. Vanhoucke, “Inception-v4, inception-resnet and the impact of residual connections on learning,” CoRR, vol. abs/1602.07261, 2016.
View at: Google Scholar
N. Tajbakhsh, J. Y. Shin, S. R. Gurudu et al., “Convolutional neural networks for medical image analysis: full training or fine tuning?” IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 1299–1312, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Liu, S. Zhou, and Q. Chen, “Discriminative deep belief networks for visual data classification,” Pattern Recognition, vol. 44, no. 10-11, pp. 2287–2296, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. M. Abdel-Zaher and A. M. Eldeib, “Breast cancer classification using deep belief networks,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 46, pp. 139–144, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y.-D. Zhang, S.-H. Wang, G. Liu, and J. Yang, “Computer-aided diagnosis of abnormal breasts in mammogram images by weighted-type fractional Fourier transform,” Advances in Mechanical Engineering, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 1–11, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. Shirazi and E. Rashedi, “Detection of cancer tumors in mammography images using support vector machine and mixed gravitational search algorithm,” in Proceedings of the 1st Conference on Swarm Intelligence and Evolutionary Computation (CSIEC '16), pp. 98–101, Iran, March 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Sewak, P. Vaidya, C.-C. Chan, and Z.-H. Duan, “SVM approach to breast cancer classification,” in Proceedings of the 2nd International Multi-Symposiums on Computer and Computational Sciences 2007 (IMSCCS '07), pp. 32–37, IEEE, Iowa City, IA, USA, August 2007.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Dheeba and S. Tamil Selvi, “Classification of malignant and benign microcalcification using SVM classifier,” in Proceedings of the 2011 International Conference on Emerging Trends in Electrical and Computer Technology (ICETECT '11), pp. 686–690, India, March 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Taheri, G. Hamer, S. H. Son, and S. Y. Shin, “Enhanced breast cancer classification with automatic thresholding using SVM and Harris corner detection,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on Research in Adaptive and Convergent Systems (RACS '16), pp. 56–60, ACM, Odense, Denmark, October 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Tan, J. Pu, and B. Zheng, “Optimization of breast mass classification using sequential forward floating selection (SFFS) and a support vector machine (SVM) model,” International Journal for Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery, vol. 9, no. 6, pp. 1005–1020, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Kavitha and K. K. Thyagharajan, “Features based mammogram image classification using weighted feature support vector machine,” Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol. 270, no. II, pp. 320–329, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. J. Kendall and M. T. Flynn, “Automated breast image classification using features from its discrete cosine transform,” PLoS ONE, vol. 9, no. 3, Article ID e91015, pp. 1–8, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
V. Oleksyuk, F. Saleheen, D. F. Caroline, S. A. Pascarella, and C.-H. Won, “Classification of breast masses using Tactile Imaging System and machine learning algorithms,” in Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology Symposium (SPMB '16), pp. 1–4, USA, Dec 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. Burling-Claridge, M. Iqbal, and M. Zhang, “Evolutionary algorithms for classification of mammographie densities using local binary patterns and statistical features,” in Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC '16), pp. 3847–3854, Canada, July 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
U. Raghavendra, U. Rajendra Acharya, H. Fujita, A. Gudigar, J. H. Tan, and S. Chokkadi, “Application of Gabor wavelet and Locality Sensitive Discriminant Analysis for automated identification of breast cancer using digitized mammogram images,” Applied Soft Computing, vol. 46, pp. 151–161, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. P. Pérez, M. A. Guevara López, A. Silva, and I. Ramos, “Improving the Mann-Whitney statistical test for feature selection: an approach in breast cancer diagnosis on mammography,” Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, vol. 63, no. 1, pp. 19–31, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. D. Rashmi, A. Lekha, and N. Bawane, “Analysis of efficiency of classification and prediction algorithms (Naïve Bayes) for Breast Cancer dataset,” in Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Emerging Research in Electronics, Computer Science and Technology (ICERECT '15), pp. 108–113, IEEE, Mandya, India, December 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Gatuha and T. Jiang, “Android based Naive Bayes probabilistic detection model for breast cancer and Mobile Cloud Computing: Design and Implementation,” International Journal of Engineering Research in Africa, vol. 21, pp. 197–208, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Benndorf, E. Kotter, M. Langer, C. Herda, Y. Wu, and E. S. Burnside, “Development of an online, publicly accessible naive Bayesian decision support tool for mammographic mass lesions based on the American College of Radiology (ACR) BI-RADS lexicon,” European Radiology, vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 1768–1775, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
V. Rodríguez-López and R. Cruz-Barbosa, “Improving bayesian networks breast mass diagnosis by using clinical data,” Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), vol. 9116, pp. 292–301, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. A. Nugroho, N. A. Setiawan, and T. B. Adji, “Cascade generalization for breast cancer detection,” in Proceedings of the 2013 5th International Conference on Information Technology and Electrical Engineering (ICITEE '13), pp. 57–61, IEEE, Yogyakarta, Indonesia, October 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
V. Rodríguez-López and R. Cruz-Barbosa, “On the breast mass diagnosis using Bayesian networks,” Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), vol. 8857, pp. 474–485, 2014.
View at: Google Scholar
S. Sivakumari, R. Praveena Priyadarsini, and P. Amudha, “Accuracy evaluation of C4.5 and Naïve Bayes classifiers using attribute ranking method,” International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 60–68, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
V. Rodríguez-López and R. Cruz-Barbosa, Improving Bayesian Networks Breast Mass Diagnosis by Using Clinical Data, pp. 292–301, Springer International Publishing, Cham, Switzerland, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site
H. M. Moftah, A. T. Azar, E. T. Al-Shammari, N. I. Ghali, A. E. Hassanien, and M. Shoman, “Adaptive k-means clustering algorithm for MR breast image segmentation,” Neural Computing and Applications, vol. 24, no. 7-8, pp. 1917–1928, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. H. Lee, J. H. Kim, K. G. Kim, S. J. Park, and W. K. Moon, K-Means Clustering and Classification of Kinetic Curves on Malignancy in Dynamic Breast MRI, pp. 2536–2539, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany, 2007.
S. Dalmiya, A. Dasgupta, and S. Kanti Datta, “Application of Wavelet based K-means Algorithm in Mammogram Segmentation,” International Journal of Computer Applications, vol. 52, no. 15, pp. 15–19, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Elmoufidi, K. El Fahssi, S. J. Andaloussi, and A. Sekkaki, “Detection of regions of interest in mammograms by using local binary pattern and dynamic K-means algorithm,” Orb Academic Publisher, 2014.
View at: Google Scholar
E. S. Samundeeswari, P. K. Saranya, and R. Manavalan, “Segmentation of Breast Ultrasound image using Regularized K-Means (ReKM) clustering,” in Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE International Conference on Wireless Communications, Signal Processing and Networking (WiSPNET '16), pp. 1379–1383, India, March 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. H. K. Rezaee, “Designing an algorithm for cancerous tissue segmentation using adaptive k-means cluttering and discrete wavelet transform,” Journal of Biomedical Physics and Engineering, pp. 93–104, 2013.
View at: Google Scholar
B. Chandra, S. Nath, and A. Malhothra, “Classification and clustering of breast cancer images,” in Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Neural Networks 2006 (IJCNN '06), pp. 3843–3847, 2006.
View at: Google Scholar
J. R. Quinlan, “Induction of decision trees,” Machine Learning, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 81–106, 1986.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. R. Quinlan, C4.5: Programs for Machine Learning, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA, USA, 1993.
A. I. Pritom, M. A. R. Munshi, S. A. Sabab, and S. Shihab, “Predicting breast cancer recurrence using effective classification and feature selection technique,” in Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Computer and Information Technology (ICCIT '16), pp. 310–314, December 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Asri, H. Mousannif, H. Al Moatassime, and T. Noel, “Using machine learning algorithms for breast cancer risk prediction and diagnosis,” Procedia Computer Science, vol. 83, pp. 1064–1069, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Breiman, “Arcing classifiers,” The Annals of Statistics, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 801–849, 1998.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | MathSciNet
J. H. Friedman, “Stochastic gradient boosting,” Computational Statistics and Data Analysis, vol. 38, Nonlinear Methods and Data Mining, no. 4, pp. 367–378, 2002.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | MathSciNet
T. Chen and C. Guestrin, “Xgboost: a scalable tree boosting system,” CoRR, vol. abs/1603.02754, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
I. El-Naqa, Y. Yang, M. N. Wernick, N. P. Galatsanos, and R. M. Nishikawa, “A support vector machine approach for detection of microcalcifications,” IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, vol. 21, no. 12, pp. 1552–1563, 2002.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R.-F. Chang, W.-J. Wu, W. K. Moon, and D.-R. Chen, “Improvement in breast tumor discrimination by support vector machines and speckle-emphasis texture analysis,” Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 679–686, 2003.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Chu, L. Li, D. Goldgof, Y. Qiu, and R. A. Clark, “Classification of masses on mammograms using support vector machine,” in Proceedings of the Medical Imaging 2003: Image Processing, pp. 940–948, USA, February 2003.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
B. K. Singh, K. Verma, A. Thoke, and J. S. Suri, “Risk stratification of 2D ultrasound-based breast lesions using hybrid feature selection in machine learning paradigm,” Measurement, vol. 105, pp. 146–157, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Lashkari and M. Firouzmand, “Early breast cancer detection in thermogram images using AdaBoost classifier and fuzzy C-Means clustering algorithm,” Middle East Journal of Cancer, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 113–124, 2016.
View at: Google Scholar
T. W. Nattkemper, B. Arnrich, O. Lichte et al., “Evaluation of radiological features for breast tumour classification in clinical screening with machine learning methods,” Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 129–139, 2005.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. A. Salazar-Licea, J. C. Pedraza-Ortega, A. Pastrana-Palma, and M. A. Aceves-Fernandez, “Location of mammograms ROI's and reduction of false-positive,” Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine, vol. 143, pp. 97–111, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. D. Marcomini, A. A. O. Carneiro, and H. Schiabel, “Application of artificial neural network models in segmentation and classification of nodules in breast ultrasound digital images,” International Journal of Biomedical Imaging, vol. 2016, Article ID 7987212, 13 pages, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D.-R. Chen, R.-F. Chang, and Y.-L. Huang, “Breast cancer diagnosis using self-organizing map for sonography,” Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 405–411, 2000.
View at: Google Scholar
Z. Iscan, Z. Dokur, and T. Ölmez, Improved Incremental Self-Organizing Map for The Segmentation of Ultrasound Images, pp. 293–302, Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, Netherlands, 2007.
F. R. Cordeiro, W. P. Santos, and A. G. Silva-Filho, “A semi-supervised fuzzy GrowCut algorithm to segment and classify regions of interest of mammographic images,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 65, pp. 116–126, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. R. Cordeiro, W. P. Santos, and A. G. Silva-Filho, “Analysis of supervised and semi-supervised GrowCut applied to segmentation of masses in mammography images,” Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering: Imaging and Visualization, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 297–315, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Z. Nawel, A. Nabiha, D. Nilanjan, and S. Mokhtar, “Adaptive semi supervised support vector machine semi supervised learning with features cooperation for breast cancer classification,” Journal of Medical Imaging and Health Informatics, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 53–62, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Zemmal, N. Azizi, and M. Sellami, “CAD system for classification of mammographic abnormalities using transductive semi supervised learning algorithm and heterogeneous features,” in Proceedings of the 12th International Symposium on Programming and Systems (ISPS '15), pp. 245–253, IEEE, Algiers, Algeria, April 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Zemmal, N. Azizi, N. Dey, and M. Sellami, “Adaptative S3VM semi supervised learning with features cooperation for breast cancer classification,” Journal of Medical Imaging and Health Informatics, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 957–967, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Zemmal, N. Azizi, M. Sellami, and N. Dey, “Automated classification of mammographic abnormalities using transductive semi supervised learning algorithm,” in Proceedings of the Mediterranean Conference on Information & Communication Technologies 2015, A. El Oualkadi, F. Choubani, and A. El Moussati, Eds., pp. 657–662, Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Peikari, J. Zubovits, G. Clarke, and A. L. Martel, “Clustering analysis for semi-supervised learning improves classification performance of digital pathology,” in Proceedings of the International Workshop on Machine Learning in Medical Imaging. MICCAI 2015, vol. 9352 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 263–270, Springer International Publishing, Cham, Switzerland, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Ankerst, M. M. Breunig, H.-P. Kriegel, and J. Sander, “Optics: Ordering points to identify the clustering structure,” SIGMOD Rec, vol. 28, pp. 49–60, June 1999.
View at: Google Scholar
Y. Zhu, F. Li, T. J. Vadakkan et al., “Three-dimensional vasculature reconstruction of tumour microenvironment via local clustering and classification,” Interface Focus, vol. 3, no. 4, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
X. Liu, J. Shi, S. Zhou, and M. Lu, “An iterated Laplacian based semi-supervised dimensionality reduction for classification of breast cancer on ultrasound images,” in Proceedings of the 2014 36th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC '14), pp. 4679–4682, USA, August 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Ding, H. D. Cheng, J. Huang, J. Liu, and Y. Zhang, “Breast ultrasound image classification based on multiple-instance learning,” Journal of Digital Imaging, vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 620–627, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Pang, Y. Wang, and J. Li, “Dirichlet-based concentric circle feature transform for breast mass classification,” in Proceedings of the 27th IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence (ICTAI 2015), vol. 2016, pp. 272–277, IEEE, Vietri sul Mare, Italy, November 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. C. Mhala and S. H. Bhandari, “Improved approach towards classification of histopathology images using bag-of-features,” in Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Signal and Information Processing (IConSIP '16), IEEE, Vishnupuri, India, October 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Hiba, Z. Hamid, and A. Omar, “An improved breast tissue density classification framework using bag of features model,” in Proceedings of the 4th IEEE International Colloquium on Information Science and Technology, CiSt 2016, pp. 405–409, Morocco, October 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. Langley, W. Iba, and K. Thompson, “Analysis of Bayesian classifiers,” in Proceedings of the 10th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI '92), pp. 223–228, AAAI Press, San Jose, Calif, USA, July 1992.
View at: Google Scholar
A. Tosun, A. B. Bener, and S. Akbarinasaji, “A systematic literature review on the applications of Bayesian networks to predict software quality,” Software Quality Journal, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 273–305, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Grover, “A Literature Review of Bayes’ Theorem and Bayesian Belief Networks (BBN),” in Strategic Economic Decision-Making, vol. 9 of SpringerBriefs in Statistics, pp. 11–27, Springer New York, New York, NY, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. M. Butler, G. I. Webb, and R. A. Lewis, “A case study in feature invention for breast cancer diagnosis using X-ray scatter images,” in AI 2003: advances in artificial intelligence, vol. 2903 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 677–685, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 2003.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar | MathSciNet
E. A. Fischer, J. Y. Lo, and M. K. Markey, “Bayesian networks of BI-RADS/spl trade/ descriptors for breast lesion classification,” in Proceedings of the 26th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (IEMBS '04), vol. 26 IV, pp. 3031–3034, IEEE, San Francisco, CA, USA, Sept. 2004.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Soria, J. M. Garibaldi, E. Biganzoli, and I. O. Ellis, “A comparison of three different methods for classification of breast cancer data,” in Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Machine Learning and Applications (ICMLA '08), pp. 619–624, USA, December 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
http://www.cs.waikato.ac.nz/ml/weka/.
T. Masquelier and S. J. Thorpe, “Unsupervised learning of visual features through spike timing dependent plasticity,” PLoS Computational Biology, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 1–11, 2007.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. MacQueen, “Some methods for classification and analysis of multivariate observations,” in Proceedings of the 5th Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability, vol. 1, pp. 281–297, University of California Press, Berkeley, Calif, USA, 1967.
View at: Google Scholar | MathSciNet
T. Kohonen, M. R. Schroeder, and T. S. Huang, Eds., Self-Organizing Maps, Springer-Verlag New York, Secaucus, NJ, USA, 3rd edition, 2001.
View at: Publisher Site | MathSciNet
T. Kohonen, “Essentials of the self-organizing map,” Neural Networks, vol. 37, Twenty-fifth Anniversay Commemorative Issue, pp. 52–65, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Kohonen, “The Self-Organizing Map,” Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 78, no. 9, pp. 1464–1480, 1990.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. C. Dunn, “A fuzzy relative of the ISODATA process and its use in detecting compact well-separated clusters,” Journal of Cybernetics, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 32–57, 1973.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. C. Bezdek, Pattern Recognition with Fuzzy Objective Function Algorithms, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, MA, USA, 1981.
View at: MathSciNet
T. C. Cahoon, M. A. Sutton, and J. C. Bezdek, “Breast cancer detection using image processing techniques,” in Proceedings of the FUZZ-IEEE 2000: 9th IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems, pp. 973–976, May 2000.
View at: Google Scholar
M. K. Markey, J. Y. Lo, G. D. Tourassi, and C. E. Floyd Jr., “Self-organizing map for cluster analysis of a breast cancer database,” Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 113–127, 2003.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
X. Zhu, “Semi-supervised learning literature survey,” Tech. Rep., University of Wisconsin-Madison, 2005, Tech. Rep. 1530, Computer Sciences.
View at: Google Scholar
C. H. Li and P. C. Yuen, “Semi-supervised Learning in Medical Image Database,” in Advances in Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, vol. 2035 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 154–160, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany, 2001.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J.-B. Li, Y. Yu, Z.-M. Yang, and L.-L. Tang, “Breast tissue image classification based on semi-supervised locality discriminant projection with kernels,” Journal of Medical Systems, vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 2779–2786, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Ngadi, A. Amine, and B. Nassih, “A robust approach for mammographic image classification using NSVC algorithm,” in Proceedings of the 1st Mediterranean Conference on Pattern Recognition and Artificial Intelligence (MedPRAI '16), vol. Part F126741, pp. 44–49, Algeria, November 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright

Copyright © 2017 Abdullah-Al Nahid and Yinan Kong. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

PDF Download Citation

Download other formats

Order printed copies

Views

14554

Downloads

5605

Citations