| Literature DB >> 34028466 |
Ashkan Shakarami1, Mohammad Bagher Menhaj2, Hadis Tarrah3.
Abstract
Todays, COVID-19 has caused much death and its spreading speed is increasing, regarding virus mutation. This outbreak warns diagnosing infected people is an important issue. So, in this research, a computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) system called COV-CAD is proposed for diagnosing COVID-19 disease. This COV-CAD system is created by a feature extractor, a classification method, and a content-based imaged retrieval (CBIR) system. The proposed feature extractor is created by using the modified AlexNet CNN. The first modification changes ReLU activation functions to LeakyReLU for increasing efficiency. The second change is converting a fully connected (FC) layer of AlexNet CNN with a new FC, which results in reducing learnable parameters and training time. Another FC layer with dimensions 1 × 64 is added at the end of the feature extractor as the feature vector. In the classification section, a new classification method is defined in which the majority voting technique is applied on outputs of CBIR, SVM, KNN, and Random Forest for final diagnosing. Furthermore, in retrieval section, the proposed method uses CBIR because of its ability to retrieve the most similar images to the image of a patient. Since this feature helps physicians to find the most similar cases, they could conduct further statistical evaluations on profiles of similar patients. The system has been evaluated by accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, F1-score, and mean average precision and its accuracy for CT and X-ray datasets is 93.20% and 99.38%, respectively. The results demonstrate that the proposed method is more efficient than other similar studies.Entities:
Keywords: AlexNet CNN; COVID-19 disease; Computer aided diagnosis (CAD) system; Content-based image retrieval (CBIR); Image classification; X-ray and CT scan
Year: 2021 PMID: 34028466 PMCID: PMC8130607 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijleo.2021.167199
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Optik (Stuttg) ISSN: 0030-4026 Impact factor: 2.443
Fig. 1Scheme of the proposed COV-CAD method.
Comparison architecture of the proposed feature extractor with AlexNet CNN.
| Layer index | AlexNet CNN | The proposed feature extractor | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Layer name | Learnable parameters | Layer name | Learnable parameters | |
| Input: 227 × 227 × 3 | 0 | Input: 227 × 227 × 3 | 0 | |
| Convolution | 34,944 | Convolution | 34,944 | |
| ReLU | 0 | LeakyReLU | 0 | |
| Normalization | 0 | Normalization | 0 | |
| Pooling | 0 | Pooling | 0 | |
| Convolution | 307,456 | Convolution | 307,456 | |
| ReLU | 0 | LeakyReLU | 0 | |
| Normalization | 0 | Normalization | 0 | |
| Pooling | 0 | Pooling | 0 | |
| Convolution | 885,120 | Convolution | 885,120 | |
| ReLU | 0 | LeakyReLU | 0 | |
| Convolution | 663,936 | Convolution | 663,936 | |
| ReLU | 0 | LeakyReLU | 0 | |
| Convolution | 442,624 | Convolution | 442,624 | |
| ReLU | 0 | LeakyReLU | 0 | |
| Pooling | 0 | Pooling | 0 | |
| Fully connected | 37,752,832 | Fully connected | 37,752,832 | |
| ReLU | 0 | LeakyReLU | 0 | |
| Dropout | 0 | Dropout | 0 | |
| Fully connected: 1 × 4096 | 16,781,312 | Fully connected: 1 × 512 | 2,097,664 | |
| – | – | LeakyReLU | 0 | |
| – | – | Dropout | 0 | |
| – | – | Fully connected: 1 × 64 | 32,832 | |
Fig. 2Pictorial form of the proposed feature extractor.
Fig. 3Comparison learnable parameters’ numbers of the proposed feature extractor with AlexNet CNN.
Fig. 4Comparisons LeakyReLU with ReLU.
Fig. 5The schematic of the proposed classification method.
Fig. 6Memory required for creating feature dataset by a) AlexNet CNN, b) the proposed feature extractor.
Implementing tools and setting.
| Parameter | Type |
|---|---|
| Environment | Matlab 2018b |
| GPU | NVIDIA GeForce 920M |
| CPU | Intel® Core™ i5-7200U@2.50 GHz |
| RAM | 6 Gigabyte |
| Training optimizer | Adam |
| Evaluation metric | Accuracy, Sensitivity, Specificity, F1-Score, and mAP |
| Data division | 5-fold cross-validation |
| Data augmentation | Used |
Training time of feature extractors per epoch.
| Feature extractor | Training time (s) |
|---|---|
| AlexNet CNN | 20 |
| 17 |
Comprising accuracy of the proposed classification method with other classifiers.
| Classifier | Accuracy ± Standard division (%) | |
|---|---|---|
| CT | X-ray | |
| SVM | 92.83 ± 1.58 | 99.12 ± 0.15 |
| KNN | 92.28 ± 0.75 | 99.38 ± 0.15 |
| Random forest | 93.01 ± 1.41 | 99.25 ± 0.26 |
Mean average precision of the proposed COV-CAD.
| Retrieval radius | mAP ±Standard division (%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5-top | 10-top | All relevant images | ||
| CT | 91.93 ± 2.72 | 91.44 ± 2.86 | 88.34 ± 2.40 | |
| X-ray | 99.28 ± 0.50 | 99.19 ± 0.51 | 98.62 ± 0.47 | |
Fig. 7Final diagnosis results of the proposed COV-CAD.
Outputs of the proposed COV-CAD for subjects’ status.
Comparison results of the proposed COV-CAD with similar researches for X-ray images.
| Method | The feature extractor | Data division | Accuracy (%) | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | F1-Score (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aslan et al. | AlexNet CNN + BiLSTM | 5-fold CV | 98.70 | Not used | 99.33 | 98.76 |
Cross-validation.