Reducing false-positive detections by combining two stage-1 computer-aided mass detection algorithms

Noah D. Bedard; Mehul P. Sampat; Patrick A. Stokes; Mia K. Markey

doi:10.1117/12.656468

Translator Disclaimer

17 March 2006 Reducing false-positive detections by combining two stage-1 computer-aided mass detection algorithms

Noah D. Bedard, Mehul P. Sampat, Patrick A. Stokes, Mia K. Markey

Author Affiliations +

Proceedings Volume 6144, Medical Imaging 2006: Image Processing; 61445U (2006) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.656468
Event: Medical Imaging, 2006, San Diego, California, United States

Abstract

In this paper we present a strategy for reducing the number of false-positives in computer-aided mass detection. Our approach is to only mark "consensus" detections from among the suspicious sites identified by different "stage-1" detection algorithms. By "stage-1" we mean that each of the Computer-aided Detection (CADe) algorithms is designed to operate with high sensitivity, allowing for a large number of false positives. In this study, two mass detection methods were used: (1) Heath and Bowyer's algorithm based on the average fraction under the minimum filter (AFUM) and (2) a low-threshold bi-lateral subtraction algorithm. The two methods were applied separately to a set of images from the Digital Database for Screening Mammography (DDSM) to obtain paired sets of mass candidates. The consensus mass candidates for each image were identified by a logical "and" operation of the two CADe algorithms so as to eliminate regions of suspicion that were not independently identified by both techniques. It was shown that by combining the evidence from the AFUM filter method with that obtained from bi-lateral subtraction, the same sensitivity could be reached with fewer false-positives per image relative to using the AFUM filter alone.

Citation Download Citation

Noah D. Bedard, Mehul P. Sampat, Patrick A. Stokes, and Mia K. Markey "Reducing false-positive detections by combining two stage-1 computer-aided mass detection algorithms", Proc. SPIE 6144, Medical Imaging 2006: Image Processing, 61445U (17 March 2006); https://doi.org/10.1117/12.656468

ACCESS THE FULL ARTICLE