Ms. Lina Arbach Profile

Lina Arbach

at Univ of Iowa

SPIE Involvement:

Author

Publications (1)

This will count as one of your downloads.

You will have access to both the presentation and article (if available).

DOWNLOAD NOW

This content is available for download via your institution's subscription. To access this item, please sign in to your personal account.

Email or Username Forgot your username?

Password Forgot your password?

Show

Keep me signed in

No SPIE account? Create an account

Proceedings Article | 15 May 2003 Paper

Classification of mammographic masses: comparison between backpropagation neural network (BNN) and human readers

Lina Arbach, Darus Bennett, Joseph Reinhardt, Ghassan Fallouh

Proceedings Volume 5032, (2003) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.480864

KEYWORDS: Neural networks, Breast cancer, Breast, Biopsy, Image segmentation, Mammography, Feature extraction, Cancer, Image processing, Lung cancer

Read Abstract +

PURPOSE: We compare mammographic mass classification performance between a backpropagation neural network (BNN), expert radiologists, and residents. Our goal is to reduce false negatives during routine reading of mammograms. METHODS: 160 cases from 3 different institutions were used. Each case contained at least one mass and had an accompanying biopsy result. Masses were extracted using region growing with seed locations identified by an expert radiologist. 10 texture and shape based features (area, perimeter, compactness, radial length, spiculation, mean/standard deviation of radial length, minimum/maximum axis, and boundary roughness) were used as inputs to a three-layer BNN. Shape features were computed on the boundary of the mass region; texture features were computed from the pixel values inside the mass. 140 cases were used for training the BNN and the remaining 20 cases were used for testing. The testing set was diagnosed by three expert radiologists, three residents, and the BNN. We evaluated the human readers and the BNN by computing the area under the ROC curve (AUC). RESULTS: The AUC was 0.923 for the BNN, 0.846 for the expert radiologists, and 0.648 for the residents. These results illustrate the promise of using BNN as a physician’s assistant for breast mass classification.

My Library

You currently do not have any folders to save your paper to! Create a new folder below.

Folder Name

Folder Description

View contact details

UPDATE YOUR PROFILE

Is this your profile? Update it now.

Sign into your SPIE.org account

Don’t have a profile and want one?

Create an account on SPIE.org

Access to the requested content is limited to institutions that have purchased or subscribe to SPIE eBooks. You are receiving this notice because your organization may not have SPIE eBooks access.*

*Shibboleth/Open Athens users─please sign in to access your institution's subscriptions.

To obtain this item, you may purchase the complete book in print or electronic format on SPIE.org.

ORGANIZATIONAL
Sign in with credentials provided by your organization.

Organizational Username

Organizational Password

Show/Hide Password

INSTITUTIONAL
Select your institution to access the SPIE Digital Library.

SELECT YOUR INSTITUTION

PERSONAL
Sign in with your SPIE account to access your personal subscriptions or to use specific features such as save to my library, sign up for alerts, save searches, etc.

PERSONAL SIGN IN

No SPIE Account? Create one

;

PURCHASE THIS CONTENT

SUBSCRIBE TO DIGITAL LIBRARY

50 downloads per 1-year subscription

Members: $195

Non-members: $335 ADD TO CART

25 downloads per 1 - year subscription

Members: $145

Non-members: $250 ADD TO CART

PURCHASE SINGLE ARTICLE

Includes PDF, HTML & Video, when available

Members:

Non-members: ADD TO CART

Keywords/Phrases

Search In:

Publication Years