4.7 Article

Weakly supervised learning for classification of lung cytological images using attention-based multiple instance learning

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 11, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-99246-4

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

An automated weakly supervised method using attention-based deep multiple instance learning was developed to classify benign and malignant lung cells in cytological images. The method showed a high classification accuracy of 0.916 and was able to automatically classify images without the need for complex annotations.
In cytological examination, suspicious cells are evaluated regarding malignancy and cancer type. To assist this, we previously proposed an automated method based on supervised learning that classifies cells in lung cytological images as benign or malignant. However, it is often difficult to label all cells. In this study, we developed a weakly supervised method for the classification of benign and malignant lung cells in cytological images using attention-based deep multiple instance learning (AD MIL). Images of lung cytological specimens were divided into small patch images and stored in bags. Each bag was then labeled as benign or malignant, and classification was conducted using AD MIL. The distribution of attention weights was also calculated as a color map to confirm the presence of malignant cells in the image. AD MIL using the AlexNet-like convolutional neural network model showed the best classification performance, with an accuracy of 0.916, which was better than that of supervised learning. In addition, an attention map of the entire image based on the attention weight allowed AD MIL to focus on most malignant cells. Our weakly supervised method automatically classifies cytological images with acceptable accuracy based on supervised learning without complex annotations.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available