|
Authors | Dataset | Access | Technique | Limitations |
|
Manogaran, G. et al. [40] | MRI dataset | Open | Thresholding, gamma distribution | The proposed work needed to accelerate real-time medical applications and computation time. |
|
Patil, D et al. [36] | BRATS 2015 | Open | Local binary pattern, empirical wavelet transform, dynamic fuzzy histogram equalization | The work lacked the accuracy of interpretation. |
|
Arun, N et al. [34] | MRI dataset | Open | Artificial neural network, machine learning | The technique affected the feature extraction because of difficulty in segmentation. |
|
Nazir, M et al. [35] | Harvard dataset | Open | K mean clustering, discrete cosine transform | The proposed study is incapable of correctly classifying malignant brain tissues. |
|
Garg, G et al. [46] | MRI dataset | Open | Principal component analysis, gray level cooccurrence matrix, stationary wavelet transform, Otsu’s threshold | The technique needed large dataset for training, had high time complexity, did not work for small dataset and required expensive GPUs which ultimately increased cost to the users. |
|
Kumar, M et al. [21] | MRI dataset | Open | Balance contrast enhancement technique, canny operator, fuzzy c-means | The technique needed to be performed on real medical images of patients in order to solve urgent diagnostic problems of patients. |
|
Bahadure, N et al. [41] | MRI dataset | Open | Berkeley wavelet transformation, support vector machine | The methodology required the combination of more than one classifier and feature selection techniques to improve the accuracy. |
|