| Literature DB >> 26543726 |
S Pitchumani Angayarkanni1, Nadira Banu Kamal2, Ranjit Jeba Thangaiya3.
Abstract
This work presents the dynamic graph cut based Otsu's method to segment the masses in mammogram images. Major concern that threatens human life is cancer. Breast cancer is the most common type of disease among women in India and abroad. Breast cancer increases the mortality rate in India especially in women since it is considered to be the second largest form of disease which leads to death. Mammography is the best method for diagnosing early stage of cancer. The computer aided diagnosis lacks accuracy and it is time consuming. The main approach which makes the detection of cancerous masses accurate is segmentation process. This paper is a presentation of the dynamic graph cut based approach for effective segmentation of region of interest (ROI). The sensitivity, the specificity, the positive prediction value and the negative prediction value of the proposed algorithm are determined and compared with the existing algorithms. Both qualitative and quantitative methods are used to detect the accuracy of the proposed system. The sensitivity, the specificity, the positive prediction value and the negative prediction value of the proposed algorithm accounts to 98.88, 98.89, 93 and 97.5% which rates very high when compared to the existing algorithms.Entities:
Keywords: Fuzzification; Graph cut; Otsu’s method and ROC
Year: 2015 PMID: 26543726 PMCID: PMC4628050 DOI: 10.1186/s40064-015-1180-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Springerplus ISSN: 2193-1801
Fig. 1Histogram of the input image.
Fig. 2Weight calculation for the 3 × 3 matrix.
Fig. 3Graph cut approach.
Fig. 4a Input image, b ROI, c segmented boundaries, d edge, e pectoral muscle identification indicated by red color, f ground truth value represented by white.
Fig. 5Segmented image.
PSNR tabulation
| PSNR | RMS | H |
| MSE | Nature of filter |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 87.65 | 2.97 | 0.2111 | 0.0086 | 8.83 | FHQ |
Segmentation technique comparision
| Parameters | Hassanien method | Proposed method |
|---|---|---|
| Target to background contrast measure based on standard deviation | 0.71 | 0.83 |
| Target to background contrast measure based on entropy | 0.76 | 0.90 |
| Index of fuzziness | 0.2892 | 0.010 |
| Fuzzy entropy | 0.1056 | −0.001 |
| PSNR | 86.75 | 90.88 |
Segmentation accuracy metrics
| Specificity | 95.5% |
| Sensitivity | 97.3% |
| Positive prediction value | 89% |
| Accuracy | 98.9% |
| Area under curve | 0.98 |
| Negative prediction value | 98% |
Computational efficiency of the proposed method
| Methods | References | System specification | Computational time based on implementation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rough set approach | Hassanien and Ali ( | Intel Pentium® CPU B950 Processor | 2′19″ |
| Mathematical | Bojar and Nieniewski ( | 2′50″ | |
| Shape and texture feature | Zakeri et al. ( | 8′21″ | |
| Shape, edge-sharpness, and texture features | Mu et al. ( | 0′45″ | |
| Proposed method | Angayarkanni et al. ( | 0′03″ |
Fig. 6F-measure.