| Literature DB >> 34249170 |
Dogun Kim1, Jaeho Choi2, Sangyoon Ahn3, Eunil Park1,4,5.
Abstract
In this study, a home dental care system consisting of an oral image acquisition device and deep learning models for maxillary and mandibular teeth images is proposed. The presented method not only classifies tooth diseases, but also determines whether a professional dental treatment (NPDT) is required. Additionally, a specially designed oral image acquisition device was developed to perform image acquisition of maxillary and mandibular teeth. Two evaluation metrics, namely, tooth disease and NPDT classifications, were examined using 610 compounded and 5251 tooth images annotated by an experienced dentist with a Doctor of Dental Surgery and another dentist with a Doctor of Dental Medicine. In the tooth disease and NPDT classifications, the proposed system showed accuracies greater than 96% and 89%, respectively. Based on these results, we believe that the proposed system will allow users to effectively manage their dental health by detecting tooth diseases by providing information on the need for dental treatment. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12652-021-03366-8.Entities:
Keywords: Applied artificial intelligence; Computer vision; Convolutional neural network; Deep learning; Dental; Home care
Year: 2021 PMID: 34249170 PMCID: PMC8259098 DOI: 10.1007/s12652-021-03366-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Ambient Intell Humaniz Comput
Fig. 1Printed circuit board and system diagram of the oral image acquisition device
A summary of the collected data
| Object | Types | Subtypes | Image samples |
|---|---|---|---|
| Teeth ROI detection | Maxillary teeth | 305 | |
| Mandibular teeth | 305 | ||
| Tooth disease classification | Normal | 4804 | |
| Tooth disease | Occlusal caries | 415 | |
| Proximal caries | 28 | ||
| Cavitation, etc. | 4 |
Fig. 2The overall pipeline of the proposed teeth ROI detector, and tooth disease and NPDT classifiers
Fig. 3The overall architecture of the proposed teeth ROI detector, and tooth disease and NPDT classifiers. The detector was based on a RetinaNet with a ResNet152 backbone (a) and a feature pyramid network (b). Subnetworks (c) were fine-tuned with maxillary and mandibular teeth images. All the teeth ROIs were detected (e) using NMS (d) was used to select one entity (e.g., bounding boxes) out of many overlapping entities. To classify each tooth, the ROI of the teeth was cropped (f) from the detected images. Both tooth diseases and NPDT were classified using a ResNeXt network with a convolutional layer, pooling layer, batch normalization, and ResNeXt blocks. The results were classified as normal or diseased teeth (g), and NPDT was also classified
Model evaluation of teeth ROI detection
| Model | Backbone | AP (%) |
|---|---|---|
| YOLOv3 (Redmon and Farhadi | Darknet-53 | 94.46 |
| Faster R-CNN (Ren et al. | ResNet-101-FPN | 96.11 |
| RetinaNet (Lin et al. | ResNet-152-FPN |
RetinaNet with ResNet-152-FPN is the most accurate detector for recording teeth ROI detection
Model evaluation of tooth disease classification
| Model | Class | Precision (%) | Recall (%) | F1-score (%) | Accuracy (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ResNet (He et al. | Tooth disease | 71.88 | 64.49 | 67.98 | 93.13 |
| Non-tooth disease | 95.53 | 96.79 | 96.16 | ||
| Shufflenet V2 (Ma et al. | Tooth disease | 74.71 | 60.75 | 67.01 | 93.25 |
| Non-tooth disease | 95.12 | 97.38 | 96.24 | ||
| DenseNet (Huang et al. | Tooth disease | 64.06 | 76.64 | 69.79 | 92.51 |
| Non-tooth disease | 96.95 | 94.53 | 95.73 | ||
| ResNext (Xie et al. | Tooth disease | ||||
| Non-tooth disease |
ResNext is the most accurate classifier for recording tooth disease classification
Model evaluation of NPDT classification
| Model | Class | Precision (%) | Recall (%) | F1-score (%) | Accuracy (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ResNet (He et al. | NPDT | 82.05 | 88.89 | 85.33 | 85.71 |
| Non-NPDT | 89.47 | 82.92 | 86.07 | ||
| Shufflenet V2 (Ma et al. | NPDT | 80.49 | 91.67 | 85.72 | 84.42 |
| Non-NPDT | 91.43 | 78.05 | 84.21 | ||
| DenseNet (Huang et al. | NPDT | 69.57 | 88.89 | 78.05 | 76.62 |
| Non-NPDT | 87.10 | 65.85 | 75.00 | ||
| ResNext (Xie et al. | NPDT | ||||
| Non-NPDT |
ResNext is the most accurate classifier on record for NPDT classification