| Literature DB >> 34745513 |
Enhui Lv1, Wenfeng Liu2, Pengbo Wen1, Xingxing Kang1.
Abstract
With the rapid development of detection technology, CT imaging technology has been widely used in the early clinical diagnosis of lung nodules. However, accurate assessment of the nature of the nodule remains a challenging task due to the subjective nature of the radiologist. With the increasing amount of publicly available lung image data, it has become possible to use convolutional neural networks for benign and malignant classification of lung nodules. However, as the network depth increases, network training methods based on gradient descent usually lead to gradient dispersion. Therefore, we propose a novel deep convolutional network approach to classify the benignity and malignancy of lung nodules. Firstly, we segmented, extracted, and performed zero-phase component analysis whitening on images of lung nodules. Then, a multilayer perceptron was introduced into the structure to construct a deep convolutional network. Finally, the minibatch stochastic gradient descent method with a momentum coefficient is used to fine-tune the deep convolutional network to avoid the gradient dispersion. The 750 lung nodules in the lung image database are used for experimental verification. Classification accuracy of the proposed method can reach 96.0%. The experimental results show that the proposed method can provide an objective and efficient aid to solve the problem of classifying benign and malignant lung nodules in medical images.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34745513 PMCID: PMC8566059 DOI: 10.1155/2021/8769652
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Healthc Eng ISSN: 2040-2295 Impact factor: 2.682
Figure 1Schematic diagram of the benign and malignant lung nodules' classification system based on DCN feature extraction.
Figure 2The processed part of the sample images of lung nodules.
Network parameter configuration.
| Layers | Input | Kernel number | Kernel size | Stride | Pad | Output | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| W | H | D | W | H | D | |||||
| Input | 28 | 28 | 1 | |||||||
| conv1 | 28 | 28 | 1 | 6 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 24 | 24 | 6 |
| cccp1 | 24 | 24 | 6 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 24 | 24 | 6 |
| cccp2 | 24 | 24 | 6 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 24 | 24 | 6 |
| maxpool1 | 24 | 24 | 6 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 12 | 12 | 6 | |
| conv2 | 12 | 12 | 6 | 12 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 8 | 8 | 12 |
| cccp3 | 8 | 8 | 12 | 12 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 8 | 8 | 12 |
| cccp4 | 8 | 8 | 12 | 12 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 8 | 8 | 12 |
| avgpool2 | 8 | 8 | 12 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 12 | |
| conv3 | 4 | 4 | 24 | 24 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 24 |
| cccp5 | 1 | 1 | 24 | 24 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 24 |
| cccp6 | 1 | 1 | 24 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Avgpool3 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | |
| Softmax-loss | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | ||||
The impact of different μ values on model classification performance.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Error (%) | 11.5 | 11.0 | 10.9 | 9.6 | 9.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Error (%) | 9.0 | 8.4 | 8.0 | 7.5 | 11.4 |
Figure 3Classification accuracy under different sample configuration schemes.
Figure 4The convergence process of the DCN structure in the process of training. (a) MB-SGD. (b) MB-SGD with momentum coefficient.
Comparison of classification results of different DL architectures.
| Method | Error (%) |
|---|---|
| DCN | 4.0 |
| CNN | 19.15 |
| DBN | 20.58 |
| SAE | 21.43 |
Figure 5Visual display of classical deep learning model feature extraction. (a) CNN. (b) DBN. (c) SAE.
Comparison of the results of different methods.
| Method | Number of nodules | Error (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Multiscale CNN [ | 865 | 15.9 |
| AlexNet + cascaded classifier [ | 1990 | 15.3 |
| VGG16 + SVM [ | 1945 | 12.2 |
| B-CNN-FT [ | 3186 | 8.8 |
| 3D-CNN + QIF [ | 664 | 6.8 |
| 3D-CNN + multiscale + multi [ | 962 | 6.08 |
| 3D-Inception-ResNet + hand-crafted features [ | 1036 | 5.02 |
| DCN + MB-SGD | 750 | 4.0 |