| Literature DB >> 32427226 |
Turker Tuncer1, Sengul Dogan1, Fatih Ozyurt2.
Abstract
Coronavirus is normally transmitted from animal to person, but nowadays it is transmitted from person to person by changing its form. Covid-19 appeared as a very dangerous virus and unfortunately caused a worldwide pandemic disease. Radiology doctors use X-ray or CT images for the diagnosis of Covid-19. It has become crucial to help diagnose such images using image processing methods. Therefore, a novel intelligent computer vision method to automatically detect the Covid-19 virus was proposed. The proposed automatic Covid-19 detection method consists of preprocessing, feature extraction, and feature selection stages. Image resizing and grayscale conversion are used in the preprocessing phase. The proposed feature generation method is called Residual Exemplar Local Binary Pattern (ResExLBP). In the feature selection phase, a novel iterative ReliefF (IRF) based feature selection is used. Decision tree (DT), linear discriminant (LD), support vector machine (SVM), k nearest neighborhood (kNN), and subspace discriminant (SD) methods are chosen as classifiers in the classification phase. Leave one out cross-validation (LOOCV), 10-fold cross-validation, and holdout validation are used for training and testing. In this work, SVM classifier achieved 100.0% classification accuracy by using 10-fold cross-validation. This result clearly has shown that the perfect classification rate by using X-ray image for Covid-19 detection. The proposed ResExLBP and IRF based method is also cognitive, lightweight, and highly accurate.Entities:
Keywords: Classification; Covid-19; Iterative ReliefF; Machine learning; Residual Exemplar LBP
Year: 2020 PMID: 32427226 PMCID: PMC7233238 DOI: 10.1016/j.chemolab.2020.104054
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Chemometr Intell Lab Syst ISSN: 0169-7439 Impact factor: 3.491
Fig. 1Samples of the used Covid-19 and chest images.
Fig. 2Graphical explanation of the LBP.
Fig. 3Schematic demonstration of the proposed ResExLBP and IRF based method.
Fig. 4Flow chart of the proposed IRF feature selector.
Parameters of the used five classifiers.
| Classifier | Parameter | Value |
|---|---|---|
| DT (Coarse Tree) | Splits | 4 |
| Split method | Gini | |
| Decision of split | Off | |
| LD | Covariance structure | Full |
| Gamma | 0 | |
| kNN (Fine kNN) | k | 1 |
| Distance | City Block | |
| Weight | Equal | |
| Standardize | True | |
| SVM (Medium Gaussian SVM) | Kernel function | Gaussian |
| Kernel scale | 38 | |
| Number of box constraint | 1 | |
| Standardize | True | |
| SD | Ensemble method | Subspace |
| Number of learning cycles | 30 | |
| Learner | Discriminant | |
| Dimension | 730 |
Transitions of the proposed ResExLBP and IRF based.
| Step | Size | Size of feature | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Preprocessing | Load chest image | W x H x 3 | |
| Grayscale conversion | W x H | ||
| Resizing | 512 × 512 | ||
| Feature generation | Exemplar division | 64 × 64 x 16 | |
| Feature generation from exemplars with LBP | 64 × 64 x 16 | 256 × 16 | |
| Feature generation from pre-processed image | 512 × 512 | 256 | |
| Feature fusion | 256 × 17 = 4352 | ||
| Feature selection with IRF | Most meaningful feature selection | 1459 | |
| Classification | Classify the selected feature by 5 traditional classifiers | Validation prediction vector with the size of 321 |
Performance measurements (%) of the proposed ResExLBP and IRF based X-ray image classification method using LOOCV.
| Classifier | CAC | SEN | SPE | BCAC | GM | Number of errors |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DT | 92.83 | 86.21 | 95.30 | 90.75 | 90.64 | 23 |
| LD | 99.07 | 96.55 | 100.0 | 98.28 | 98.26 | 3 |
| kNN | 97.20 | 89.66 | 100.0 | 94.83 | 94.69 | 9 |
| SVM | 99.69 | 98.85 | 100.0 | 99.43 | 99.42 | 1 |
| SD | 99.07 | 96.65 | 100.0 | 98.28 | 98.26 | 3 |
Fig. 5LOOCV results of the proposed ResExLBP and IRF based Covid-19 detection method (a) Confusion matrix (b) ROC curve.
Performance measurements (%) of the proposed ResExLBP and IRF based X-ray image classification method using the 10-fold CV.
| Classifier | Statistics | CAC | SEN | SPE | BCAC | GM |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DT | Mean | 96.63 | 87.55 | 100.0 | 93.78 | 93.56 |
| Std | 0.53 | 1.95 | 0.0 | 0.97 | 1.05 | |
| Max | 97.82 | 91.95 | 100.0 | 95.98 | 95.89 | |
| LD | Mean | 99.11 | 95.81 | 99.97 | 97.89 | 97.87 |
| Std | 0.44 | 1.18 | 0.11 | 0.59 | 0.60 | |
| Max | 99.69 | 98.85 | 100.0 | 99.43 | 99.42 | |
| kNN | Mean | 96.63 | 87.55 | 100.0 | 93.78 | 93.56 |
| Std | 0.53 | 1.95 | 0 | 0.97 | 1.05 | |
| Max | 97.82 | 91.95 | 100.0 | 95.98 | 95.89 | |
| SVM | Mean | 99.55 | 98.29 | 100.0 | 99.15 | 99.14 |
| Std | 0.17 | 0.59 | 0 | 0.30 | 0.30 | |
| Max | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | |
| SD | Mean | 98.70 | 94.89 | 100.0 | 97.45 | 97.41 |
| Std | 0.47 | 1.44 | 0 | 0.72 | 0.74 | |
| Max | 99.07 | 96.55 | 100.0 | 98.28 | 98.26 |
Performance measurements (%) of the proposed ResExLBP and IRF based X-ray image classification method using the 80% training, 20% testing.
| Classifier | Statistics | CAC | SEN | SPE | BCAC | GM |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DT | Mean | 91.30 | 82.97 | 94.44 | 88.71 | 88.35 |
| Std | 3.5 | 9.18 | 3.8 | 4.7 | 5.10 | |
| Max | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100 | 100.0 | |
| LD | Mean | 98.61 | 95.05 | 99.95 | 97.50 | 97.43 |
| Std | 1.40 | 5.07 | 0.34 | 2.54 | 2.64 | |
| Max | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | |
| kNN | Mean | 96.62 | 87.64 | 100.0 | 93.82 | 93.52 |
| Std | 2.09 | 7.65 | 0 | 3.83 | 4.17 | |
| Max | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | |
| SVM | Mean | 99.45 | 97.98 | 100.0 | 98.99 | 98.97 |
| Std | 0.85 | 3.09 | 0 | 1.54 | 1.58 | |
| Max | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | |
| SD | Mean | 98.09 | 93.04 | 99.9 | 96.52 | 96.40 |
| Std | 1.67 | 6.09 | 0.001 | 3.04 | 3.21 | |
| Max | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
Performance measurements (%) of the proposed ResExLBP and IRF based X-ray image classification method using the 50% training, 50% testing.
| Classifier | Statistics | CAC | SEN | SPE | BCAC | GM |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DT | Mean | 90.49 | 81.49 | 93.8 | 87.64 | 87.32 |
| Std | 2.4 | 7.06 | 2.83 | 3.43 | 3.73 | |
| Max | 95.63 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 94.99 | 94.95 | |
| LD | Mean | 97.74 | 91.80 | 99.93 | 95.86 | 95.75 |
| Std | 1.14 | 4.23 | 0.24 | 2.11 | 2.22 | |
| Max | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | |
| kNN | Mean | 95.39 | 82.84 | 100.0 | 91.42 | 90.96 |
| Std | 1.64 | 6.08 | 0 | 3.04 | 3.38 | |
| Max | 99.38 | 97.67 | 100.0 | 98.84 | 98.83 | |
| SVM | Mean | 99.06 | 96.63 | 99.95 | 98.29 | 98.26 |
| Std | 0.89 | 3.32 | 0.20 | 1.65 | 1.70 | |
| Max | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | |
| SD | Mean | 96.84 | 88.48 | 99.91 | 94.14 | 93.99 |
| Std | 1.30 | 4.79 | 0.30 | 2.39 | 2.56 | |
| Max | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
Fig. 6Scatter plot of the extracted and selected features.
Fig. 7Future applications about Covid-19 detection.