4.6 Article

A novel feature selection framework based on grey wolf optimizer for mammogram image analysis

期刊

NEURAL COMPUTING & APPLICATIONS
卷 33, 期 21, 页码 14583-14602

出版社

SPRINGER LONDON LTD
DOI: 10.1007/s00521-021-06099-z

关键词

Breast cancer; Grey wolf optimizer; Rough set theory; Feature selection; Mammogram

资金

  1. Department of Science and Technology (DST), India through the improvement of Science for Equity Empowerment and Development (SEED) programme [SEED/WS/018/2015]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A novel CAD system for mammogram image analysis is proposed using GWO and rough set theory, with a new dimensionality reduction algorithm to extract appropriate features. The hybridization of GWORS methods outperforms other techniques in accuracy and efficiency.
Breast cancer is one of the significant tumor death in women. Computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) supports the radiologists in recognizing the irregularities in an efficient manner. In this work, a novel CAD system proposed for mammogram image analysis based on grey wolf optimizer (GWO) with rough set theory. Texture, intensity, and shape-based features are extracted from mass segmented mammogram images. To derive the appropriate features from the extracted feature set, a novel dimensionality reduction algorithm is proposed based on GWO with rough set theory. GWO is a novel bio-inspired optimization algorithm, stimulated based on hunting activities and social hierarchy of the grey wolves. In this paper, a hybridization of GWO and Rough Set (GWORS) methods are used to find the significant features from the extracted mammogram images. To evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed GWORS, we compare it with other well-known rough set and bio-inspired feature selection algorithms including particle swarm optimize, genetic algorithm, Quick Reduct and Relative Reduct. From empirical results, it is observed that the proposed GWORS outperforms the other techniques in terms of accuracy, F-Measures and receiver operating characteristic curve.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据