Name
Abstract | ||
|---|---|---|
Creating classifiers for computer-aided diagnosis in the absence of ground truth is a challenging problem. Using experts' opinions as reference truth is difficult because the variability in the experts' interpretations introduces uncertainty in the labeled diagnostic data. This uncertainty translates into noise, which can significantly affect the performance of any classifier on test data. To address this problem, we propose a new label set weighting approach to combine the experts' interpretations and their variability, as well as a selective iterative classification (SIC) approach that is based on conformal prediction. Using the NIH/NCI Lung Image Database Consortium (LIDC) dataset in which four radiologists interpreted the lung nodule characteristics, including the degree of malignancy, we illustrate the benefits of the proposed approach. Our results show that the proposed 2-label-weighted approach significantly outperforms the accuracy of the original 5label and 2-label-unweighted classification approaches by 39.9% and 7.6%, respectively. We also found that the weighted 2-label models produce higher skewness values by 1.05 and 0.61 for non-SIC and SIC respectively on root mean square error (RMSE) distributions. When each approach was combined with selective iterative classification, this further improved the accuracy of classification for the 2-weighted-label by 7.5% over the original, and improved the skewness of the 5-label and 2-unweighted-label by 0.22 and 0.44 respectively. |
Year | DOI | Venue |
|---|---|---|
2017 | 10.1117/12.2255559 | Proceedings of SPIE |
Keywords | Field | DocType |
Computer-aided diagnosis,LIDC,belief decision tree,iterative classification,conformal prediction,confidence | Decision tree,Weighting,Skewness,Pattern recognition,Computer science,Computer-aided diagnosis,Mean squared error,Ground truth,Test data,Artificial intelligence,Classifier (linguistics),Machine learning | Conference |
Volume | ISSN | Citations |
10134 | 0277-786X | 0 |
PageRank | References | Authors |
0.34 | 7 | 5 |
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rachael N. Affenit | 1 | 0 | 0.34 |
| Erik R. Barns | 2 | 0 | 0.34 |
| Jacob D. Furst | 3 | 545 | 56.63 |
| Alexander Rasin | 4 | 2950 | 209.48 |
| Daniela Stan Raicu | 5 | 469 | 46.22 |