| Literature DB >> 33531722 |
Turker Tuncer1, Fatih Ozyurt2, Sengul Dogan1, Abdulhamit Subasi3,4.
Abstract
Nowadays, Covid-19 is the most important disease that affects daily life globally. Therefore, many methods are offered to fight against Covid-19. In this paper, a novel fuzzy tree classification approach was introduced for Covid-19 detection. Since Covid-19 disease is similar to pneumonia, three classes of data sets such as Covid-19, pneumonia, and normal chest x-ray images were employed in this study. A novel machine learning model, which is called the exemplar model, is presented by using this dataset. Firstly, fuzzy tree transformation is applied to each used chest image, and 15 images (3-level F-tree is constructed in this work) are obtained from a chest image. Then exemplar division is applied to these images. A multi-kernel local binary pattern (MKLBP) is applied to each exemplar and image to generate features. Most valuable features are selected using the iterative neighborhood component (INCA) feature selector. INCA selects the most distinctive 616 features, and these features are forwarded to 16 conventional classifiers in five groups. These groups are decision tree (DT), linear discriminant (LD), support vector machine (SVM), ensemble, and k-nearest neighbor (k-NN). The best-resulted classifier is Cubic SVM, and it achieved 97.01% classification accuracy for this dataset.Entities:
Keywords: Corona; Covid-19; Fuzzy tree; X-ray image recognition; multi-kernel local binary pattern; texture recognition
Year: 2021 PMID: 33531722 PMCID: PMC7844388 DOI: 10.1016/j.chemolab.2021.104256
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Chemometr Intell Lab Syst ISSN: 0169-7439 Impact factor: 3.491
Fig. 1MKLBP procedure.
Fig. 2Graphical demonstration of an example about MKLBP.
Fig. 3Representation of chest x-ray images.
Fig. 4Graphical outline of the F-transform, MKLBP, and INCA based chest image classification method.
Fig. 5Pseudocode of the peak value (threshold value) calculation.
Step 2.3: Calculate indices of the maximum points of the and and these points are used to create triangle fuzzy sets. The pseudocode of this calculation is given in Fig. 5.
Step 2.4: Create triangle fuzzy sets using t_1 and t_2. A and B sets are created using these points.
Step 2.5: Calculate membership degrees of each pixel using Eqs. (11), (12).
Fig. 6The fuzzy tree-based image generation.
Step 3: Resize the generated 15 images to 256 × 256 sized images.
Step 4: Extract 768 features from each image by using MKLBP.
Step 5: Divide images into 128 × 128 sized exemplars.
Step 6: Extract 768 features from each exemplar.
Step 7: Concatenate the features and obtain a final feature vector with a size of 768 × 75 = 57,600.
Step 8: Apply INCA to extracted 57,600 features and select 616 most valuable features.
The parameters of the used classifiers.
| Group | Classifier | Parameters |
|---|---|---|
| Tree [ | Fine | Number of splits: 100, Criteria: Gini |
| Medium | Number of splits: 20, Criteria: Gini | |
| Discriminant [ | Linear Discriminant | Covariance structure is full. |
| SVM [ | Cubic | Kernel: Cubic (3rd degree polynomial), C: 1, Multiclass: 1 vs 1 |
| Quadratic | Kernel: Quadratic (2nd degree polynomial), C: 1, Multiclass: 1 vs 1 | |
| Gaussian | Kernel: Gaussian, C: 1, Multiclass: 1 vs 1 | |
| Linear | Kernel: Linear, C: 1, Multiclass: 1 vs 1 | |
| k-NN [ | Fine | k:1, Distance: City Block, Weight: Equal |
| Medium | k:10, Distance: Euclidean, Weight: Equal | |
| Coarse | k:100, Distance: Euclidean, Weight: Equal | |
| Cosine | k:10, Distance: Cosine, Weight: Equal | |
| Cubic | k:10, Distance: Cubic, Weight: Equal | |
| Weighted | k:10, Weight: Squared inverse Distance: Euclidean, | |
| Ensemble [ | Bagged Tree | Method: Bag, Splits: 434, Learners: 30 Learner type: Decision tree, |
| Subspace discriminant | Subspace domain: 308,Method: Subspace, Learners: 30, Learner type: Discriminant | |
| Subspace k-NN | Subspace domain: 308, Method: Subspace, Learners: 30, Learner type: k-NN, |
Performance results (%) of the used classifiers.
| Group | Classifiers | Statistical Evaluation | Accuracy | Geometric Mean | Precision | Recall |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DT | Tree Fine | Max | 86.90 | 87.00 | 86.97 | 87.06 |
| Mean | 83.57 | 83.64 | 83.68 | 83.81 | ||
| Min | 80.23 | 80.24 | 80.30 | 80.54 | ||
| Std | 1.40 | 1.41 | 1.40 | 1.38 | ||
| Tree Medium | Max | 86.90 | 86.98 | 86.94 | 87.16 | |
| Mean | 83.56 | 83.63 | 83.67 | 83.80 | ||
| Min | 80.46 | 80.46 | 80.70 | 80.74 | ||
| Std | 1.39 | 1.40 | 1.38 | 1.38 | ||
| LD | LD | Max | 82.30 | 82.12 | 82.46 | 82.86 |
| Mean | 79.11 | 78.80 | 79.14 | 79.69 | ||
| Min | 76.55 | 76.18 | 76.57 | 77.04 | ||
| Std | 1.34 | 1.40 | 1.35 | 1.32 | ||
| SVM | Cubic | Max | 97.01 | 97.06 | 97.11 | 97.09 |
| Mean | 96.23 | 96.29 | 96.37 | 96.32 | ||
| Min | 95.17 | 95.22 | 95.34 | 95.26 | ||
| Std | 0.42 | 0.43 | 0.40 | 0.43 | ||
| Quadratic | Max | 96.78 | 96.83 | 96.90 | 96.86 | |
| Mean | 95.84 | 95.90 | 96.00 | 95.94 | ||
| Min | 94.94 | 94.96 | 95.13 | 94.99 | ||
| Std | 0.38 | 0.38 | 0.36 | 0.38 | ||
| Gaussian | Max | 96.32 | 96.39 | 96.44 | 96.42 | |
| Mean | 95.37 | 95.46 | 95.50 | 95.50 | ||
| Min | 94.02 | 94.09 | 94.15 | 94.15 | ||
| Std | 0.44 | 0.44 | 0.43 | 0.43 | ||
| Linear | Max | 95.40 | 95.48 | 95.57 | 95.53 | |
| Mean | 94.75 | 94.83 | 94.93 | 94.89 | ||
| Min | 94.02 | 94.09 | 94.29 | 94.15 | ||
| Std | 0.31 | 0.31 | 0.30 | 0.31 | ||
| k-NN | Fine | Max | 96.09 | 96.16 | 96.29 | 96.20 |
| Mean | 95.19 | 95.24 | 95.42 | 95.28 | ||
| Min | 93.10 | 93.12 | 93.51 | 93.14 | ||
| Std | 0.59 | 0.60 | 0.55 | 0.60 | ||
| Medium | Max | 93.33 | 93.39 | 93.68 | 93.41 | |
| Mean | 92.25 | 92.27 | 92.69 | 92.29 | ||
| Min | 91.03 | 91.05 | 91.45 | 91.09 | ||
| Std | 0.42 | 0.43 | 0.40 | 0.43 | ||
| Coarse | Max | 87.13 | 86.92 | 88.02 | 87.06 | |
| Mean | 85.84 | 85.54 | 86.79 | 85.75 | ||
| Min | 84.83 | 84.44 | 85.82 | 84.69 | ||
| Std | 0.50 | 0.52 | 0.47 | 0.51 | ||
| Cosine | Max | 92.64 | 92.73 | 92.81 | 92.81 | |
| Mean | 91.70 | 91.77 | 91.80 | 91.89 | ||
| Min | 90.34 | 90.42 | 90.42 | 90.54 | ||
| Std | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.47 | ||
| Cubic | Max | 92.87 | 92.87 | 93.31 | 92.89 | |
| Mean | 91.79 | 91.74 | 92.34 | 91.76 | ||
| Min | 90.57 | 90.49 | 91.14 | 90.52 | ||
| Std | 0.45 | 0.46 | 0.41 | 0.45 | ||
| Weighted | Max | 95.86 | 95.92 | 96.05 | 95.95 | |
| Mean | 94.78 | 94.85 | 95.01 | 94.90 | ||
| Min | 93.79 | 93.81 | 94.09 | 93.85 | ||
| Std | 0.44 | 0.44 | 0.41 | 0.44 | ||
| Ensemble | Bagged Tree | Max | 93.10 | 93.21 | 93.12 | 93.31 |
| Mean | 90.92 | 91.02 | 90.98 | 91.14 | ||
| Min | 88.74 | 88.83 | 88.74 | 88.99 | ||
| Std | 0.90 | 0.90 | 0.89 | 0.89 | ||
| Subspace Discriminant | Max | 91.95 | 92.06 | 92.11 | 92.22 | |
| Mean | 89.87 | 89.94 | 90.03 | 90.18 | ||
| Min | 87.36 | 87.42 | 87.63 | 87.70 | ||
| Std | 1.08 | 1.09 | 1.06 | 1.05 | ||
| Subspace kNN | Max | 96.55 | 96.59 | 96.73 | 96.62 | |
| Mean | 95.58 | 95.62 | 95.79 | 95.66 | ||
| Min | 94.25 | 94.22 | 94.43 | 94.25 | ||
| Std | 0.52 | 0.53 | 0.50 | 0.52 |
Fig. 7The calculated loss values of our feature by using INCA feature selector with Fine k-NN.
Fig. 8Boxplot of the generated p-values of the features of a couple of the classes.
The calculated minimum of p-values.
| Classes | Healthy-Covid19 | Healthy-Pneumonia | Covid19-Pneumonia |
|---|---|---|---|
| p-values | 7.0569e-42 | 5.6981e-31 | 0 |
Fig. 9Confusion matrix of our best result.
Results of the transfer learning models and our presented F-transform, MKLBP, and INCA based model.
| Method | Accuracy |
|---|---|
| AlexNet [ | 93.56 |
| GoogLeNet [ | 93.79 |
| ResNet18 [ | 94.71 |
| ResNet50 [ | 95.17 |
| ResNet101 [ | 94.94 |
| VGG16 [ | 94.02 |
| VGG19 [ | 95.63 |
| InceptionNet v3 [ | 93.56 |
| DenseNet201 [ | 95.86 |
| MobileNet [ | 93.79 |
| Our Method | 97.01 |
Comparison of the proposed method with previous studies.
| Study | Attributes of dataset | Feature extraction and classification methods | Type of Images | Accuracy (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [ | 125 COVID-19 | DarkCovidNet | Xray Images | 87.02 |
| [ | 25 COVID-19 | COVIDX-Net | Xray Images | 90.0 |
| [ | 224 COVID-19 | VGG-19 | Xray Images | 93.48 |
| [ | 777 COVID-19 | DRE-Net | CT Images | 86 |
| [ | 25 COVID-19 | ResNet50þ SVM | Xray Images | 95.38 |
| [ | 313 COVID-19 | UNetþ3D Deep Network | CT Images | 90.8 |
| [ | 53 COVID-19 | COVID-Net | 92.4 | |
| [ | 219 COVID-19 | ResNet þ Location Attention | CT Images | 86.7 |
| [ | 195 COVID-19 | M-Inception | CT Images | 82.9 |
| [ | 449 patients with COVID-19, 425 normal ones, 98 with lung cancer, 98 with lung cancer | Multitask learning | CT images | 94.67 |
| [ | 320 COVID-19 | Deep convolutional neural network | CT images | 93.64 |
| [ | 100 COVID-19 | Convolutional neural network | Xray Images | 95.74 |
| [ | 80 COVID-19 | Convolutional neural network | CT images | 96.2 |
| Our Proposed method | 135 COVID-19, 150 Healthy 150 Pneumonia | F-transform, MKLBP and SVM | Xray Images | 97.01 |
Fig. 10Snapshot of the architecture of the intended/planned cloud-based automated Covid19 detection application.