| Literature DB >> 35035008 |
Tarun Agrawal1, Prakash Choudhary1.
Abstract
Chest radiography (X-ray) is the most common diagnostic method for pulmonary disorders. A trained radiologist is required for interpreting the radiographs. But sometimes, even experienced radiologists can misinterpret the findings. This leads to the need for computer-aided detection diagnosis. For decades, researchers were automatically detecting pulmonary disorders using the traditional computer vision (CV) methods. Now the availability of large annotated datasets and computing hardware has made it possible for deep learning to dominate the area. It is now the modus operandi for feature extraction, segmentation, detection, and classification tasks in medical imaging analysis. This paper focuses on the research conducted using chest X-rays for the lung segmentation and detection/classification of pulmonary disorders on publicly available datasets. The studies performed using the Generative Adversarial Network (GAN) models for segmentation and classification on chest X-rays are also included in this study. GAN has gained the interest of the CV community as it can help with medical data scarcity. In this study, we have also included the research conducted before the popularity of deep learning models to have a clear picture of the field. Many surveys have been published, but none of them is dedicated to chest X-rays. This study will help the readers to know about the existing techniques, approaches, and their significance.Entities:
Keywords: Computer vision; Deep convolutional neural network; GAN; Lung segmentation; Multiclass classification; Nodule, TB, COVID-19, Pneumothorax detection
Year: 2022 PMID: 35035008 PMCID: PMC8741572 DOI: 10.1007/s00371-021-02352-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Vis Comput ISSN: 0178-2789 Impact factor: 2.835
Fig. 1Categorization of the paper
Fig. 2Workflow of a Computer Vision and b Deep Learning
Fig. 3Event from the theoretical neural network to Deep Learning models
Fig. 4Basic structure of different popular deep CNN architectures
Fig. 5Basic diagram of a Residual Block b Inception Block c Dense Block
Publicly available datasets
| S. no. | Dataset | Year | Modality | Instances | Resolution | Projection | Publicly available |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | JSRT | 2000 | X-Ray | 247 | 2048 | PA | Yes |
| 2 | MC | 2014 | X-Ray | 138 | 4020 | PA | Yes |
| 3 | Shenzhen | 2014 | X-Ray | 762 | 3000 | AP | Yes |
| 4 | Indiana | 2016 | X-Ray | 7470 | – | PA | Yes |
| 5 | CXR-14 | 2017 | X-Ray | 112,120 | 1024 | PA/AP | Yes |
| 6 | CheXpert | 2019 | X-Ray | 224,316 | – | – | Yes |
| 7 | MIMIC | 2019 | X-Ray | 371,920 | – | – | No |
| 8 | COVID-19 | 2020 | X-ray | 679 | 224 | PA/AP | Yes |
Fig. 6Diseases diagnosis with chest X-rays [175]
Quantitative comparison of rule and deformable model-based lung segmentation methods. Accuracy, dice similarity coefficient (DSC), jaccard index (JI), and inference time are reported for comparison
| Methods | Dataset | Technique | Results(%) | Time(s) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Accuracy | DSC | JI | ||||
| Intensity based [ | Private | Thresholding, Filtering, Contour smoothing | 79.0 | – | – | – |
| Edge based [ | Private | Edge tracing algorithm | 95.85 | – | – | 0.84 |
| Edge based [ | Private | Derivative function, Iterative contour smoothing | 95.6 | – | – | 0.775 |
| Knowledge based [ | Private | Robust snake model, Textual, Spatial and Shape characteristics | 80.0 | – | – | – |
| Parametric model [ | Private | ASM, Adaptive gray-level appearance model, kNN | – | – | 95.5 | 4.1 |
| Parametric model [ | JSRT | SIFT, Optimization algorithm | – | – | 94.9 | 75 |
| Geometric model [ | Private | Level set energy, Equalized histogram, Canny edge detector, Otsu thresholding | – | 88.0 | – | 7 |
| Geometric model [ | JSRT | Lung model calculation, Graph cut segmentation | 91.0 | 91.0 | – | 8 |
| Geometric model [ | JSRT | Adaptive parameter learning, Graph cut segmentation | – | – | 91.1 | 8 |
| Geometric model [ | JSRT, MC | Image retrieval, SIFT flow, Graph cut optimization | 95.4 | – | – | 20–25 |
| Hybrid model [ | JSRT | Robust shape initialization, Local sparse shape composition, Local appearance model, Hierarchical deformable segmentation framework | – | 97.2 | 94.6 | 35.2 |
| Hybrid method [ | JSRT | Modified gradient vector flow-ASM | – | – | 89.1 | – |
Quantitative comparison of shallow and deep learning models. Accuracy (Acc.), dice similarity coefficient (DSC), jaccard index (JI), and time are reported for comparison. If the time is in second(s), then it is the inference time; otherwise, it is the model training time. SGD is the abbreviation for stochastic gradient descent, ReLu for rectified linear unit, lr for learning rate, and AF for activation function
| Methods | Optimizer | AF | LR scheduling | Images size | Pre-processing step | Dataset | Technique | Acc. | DSC | JI | Time |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SL [ | – | – | – | 440 | Image resizing | JSRT | Gaussian kernel distance matrix, FCM | 97.8 | – | – | – |
| SL [ | – | – | – | 2048 | No pre-processing is performed | JSRT, MC, CXR-14 | FCM, Level set algorithm | – | 97.6 | 95.6 | 25–30(s) |
| SL [ | – | – | – | – | No pre-processing is performed | Private | Linear discriminant, kNN, Neural Network, gray level thresholding | 76.0 | – | – | – |
| SL [ | – | – | – | 1024 | Images are resized using the bilinear interpolation | Private | Markov random field classifier, Iterated conditional modes | 94.8 | – | – | – |
| DL [ | SGD | – | lr = 0.1 and it decreased to 0.01 after training 70 epochs | 256 | Image resizing | JSRT; MC | Residual learning, atrous convolution layers, network wise training | – | 98.0 | 96.1 | – |
| DL [ | Adam | ELU, Sigmoid | lr = 0.00001 with | 128 | Image resizing | JSRT | UNet, ELU, Highly restrictive regularization | – | 97.4 | 95.0 | 33.0(hr) |
| DL [ | Adam | ReLu | lr = 0.001 | 256 | Image resizing and data augmentation by affine transformations | JSRT | UNet, cross-validation | – | 98.0 | 97.0 | – |
| DL [ | SGD | ReLu, Softmax | lr = 0.01 | 512 | Image resizing and scaling | MC | AlexNet, ResNet-18, Patch classification, Reconstruction of lungs | 96.9 | 94.0 | 88.07 | – |
| DL [ | SGD | ReLu, Softmax | – | 2048 | Histogram equalization and local contrast normalization is applied | JSRT | Modified SegNet | 96.2 | 95.0 | – | 3.0(hr) |
| DL [ | – | ReLu, Softmax | – | 2048 | No pre-processing is performed | JSRT | SegNet | – | 95.9 | – | – |
| DL [ | Adam | ReLu, Softmax | lr = 0.0001 with | 224 | Image resizing and data augmentation by flipping, rotating, and cropping | JSRT, MC | Modified SegNet (Lf-SegNet) | 98.73 | – | 95.10 | – |
| DL [ | SGD | – | lr = 0.02 with poly learning rate policy | 512 | Image resizing and data augmentation by image to image translation | JSRT, MC, NIH | ResNet-101, dilated convolution, CCAM, MUNIT | – | 97.6 | – | – |
| DL [ | SGD | ReLu, Sigmoid | lr = 0.01 with decrease in by factor 10 when validation accuracy is not improved | 512 | Image resizing | JSRT, MC, Shenzhen | ResNet-101, UNet, self-attention modules | – | 97.2 | – | 1.4(s) |
Quantitative comparison of nodule detection methods. Accuracy, sensitivity for false positive per image (FPPI), and inference time are reported for comparison. For [33] training time is reported. SGD is the abbreviation for stochastic gradient descent, ReLu for rectified linear unit, lr for learning rate, and AF for activation function
| Method | Optimizer | AF | LR scheduling | Images size | Pre-processing step | Dataset | Technique | Accuracy | Sensitivity | Time(s) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ANN [ | – | – | – | 32 | Background removal for nodule enhancement and contrast enhancement | Private | CNN with fuzzy training, circular background subtraction technique | – | – | 15 |
| ANN [ | Gradient-descent | – | lr = 0.1 | 128 | Lung field segmentation using deformable models (snakes) | JSRT, Private | Neural network, LoG, gabor kernel | 95.7-98.0(4-10) | 60.0-75.0(4-10) | 500 |
| CAD [ | – | – | – | 256 | Deformable model (ASM) is used for lung field segmentation and local normalization is performed to achieve the global contrast equalization | JSRT | ASM, local normalization (LN) filtering, Lindeberg detector, Gaussian filter bank | 51.0(2), 67.0(4) | – | – |
| CAD [ | – | – | – | 2048 | Lung segmentation using multi-segment ASM, gray-level morphological operators for enhancing nodules and rib suppression | JSRT, Private | ASM, watershed algorithm, leave-one out cross-validation, SVM with a Gaussian kernel | – | 77.1(2), 83.3(5) | 70 |
| ANN [ | – | – | – | 2048 | Lung segmentation using multi-segment ASM, gray-level morphological operators for enhancing nodules and rib suppression using MTANNs | JSRT, Private | VDE, MTANN, morphological filtering, support vector classifier | – | 85.0(5) | 115 |
| DL [ | SGD | ReLu | – | 229 | Unsharp mask sharpening technique | JSRT | Unsharp mask sharpening, E-CNN, five-fold cross-validation | – | 84.0(2), 94.0(5) | – |
| DL [ | SGD | ReLu | lr = 0.001 which drops 0.00001 after every iteration | 224 | Random rotation and mirroring, image enhancement with gray-level stretching and histogram matching, lung field segmentation and rib suppression using ASM and PCA, respectively | JSRT, Shenzhen | ASM, PCA, dense blocks, fivefold cross-validation | 99.0(0.2) | – | – |
| DL [ | SGD | ReLu, Softmax | lr = 0.001 | 229 | Horizontal inversion, angle rotation and flipping, lung field segmentation using multi-segment ASM | JSRT | ASM, watershed algorithm, GoogLeNet | – | 91.4(2), 97.1(5) | – |
Quantitative comparison of TB detection methods. Accuracy, sensitivity, and area under curve (AUC) are reported for comparison. SGD is the abbreviation for stochastic gradient descent, ReLu for rectified linear unit, lr for learning rate, and AF for activation function
| Method | Optimizer | AF | LR scheduling | Images size | Pre-processing step | Dataset | Technique | Accuracy | Sensitivity | AUC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CAD [ | – | – | – | 932 | Lung field segmentation using ASM | Private | ASM, Gaussian derivative filter, kNN algorithm | – | 86.0 | 82.0 |
| CAD [ | – | – | – | 2048 | Lung field segmentation using intensity, lung model and Log Gabor masks | JSRT, MC | lung model, intensity and LoG mask, SVM, leave-one out evaluation | 75.0 | – | 83.12 |
| CAD [ | – | – | – | 2048 | Lung field segmentation using graph cut method | JSRT, MC, Shenzhen | Graph cut segmentation, ODI, CBIR, SVM | 84.0 | – | 90.0 |
| DL [ | SGD | ReLu, Softmax | lr = 0.01 and it is decreased by a factor of 2 for every 30 epochs | 520 | Images resizing and data augmentation | MC, Shenzhen | AlexNet, transfer learning, dataset augmentation, threefold cross-validation | 90.3 | – | 96.4 |
| DL [ | SGD | – | Training from scratch, lr = 0.01, pre-trained network, lr = 0.001 | 256 | Data augmentation and histogram equalization | MC, Shenzhen | GoogLeNet, AlexNet, transfer learning, data augmentation | – | – | 99.0 |
| DL [ | Adam | ReLu, Softmax | lr = 0.0001 | 224 | No pre-processing is performed | MC, Shenzhen | CNN | 94.73 | – | – |
| DL [ | Nesterov ADAM | ReLu | lr = 0.001 and decreased by factor of 10 when validation loss stops improving | 224 | Image resizing, normalization, and data augmentation | MC, Shenzhen, CXR-14 | DenseNet121, transfer learning, meta data | – | – | 93.7 |
| DL [ | Adam | ReLu, Softmax | lr = 0.001 | 512 | Image cropping, resizing, and normalization | MC, Shenzhen | CNN, grad-CAM, cross-validation | 86.2 | – | 92.5 |
| DL [ | SGD | ReLu, Softmax | lr = 0.001 | 224 | Image normalization using Z-score, lung segmentation and data augmentation | MC, Shenzhen | ResNet18, ResNet-101, VGG-19, InceptionV3, UNet, transfer learning, score-CAM | 98.6 | 98.56 | – |
| DL [ | SGD | ReLu | lr = 0.01 with rate decay of 0.5 | 224 | Unsharp Masking, High-Frequency Emphasis Filtering, and Contrast Limited Adaptive Histogram Equalization, cropping, image normalization | Shenzhen | ResNet-18, ResNet-50, EfficientNet-B4, UM, HEF, CLAHE, transfer learning | 89.92 | – | 94.8 |
| DL [ | – | ReLu | – | 300 | Image normalization and resizing | MC, Shenzhen | Inception-v3, MobileNet, ResNet50, Gabor filter, cross-validation | 97.59 | – | 99.0 |
| DL [ | – | ReLu, Softmax | – | 224 | Image resizing and data augmentation | MC, Shenzhen, COVID-19 | Transformer model, EfficientNetB0, EfficientNetB1, transfer learning | 97.72 | – | 100 |
| DL [ | – | – | – | 512 | Image resizing, normalization, and data augmentation | MC, Shenzhen, Private | ResNext, UNet | 91.0 | 85.7 | 91.0 |
Quantitative comparison of pneumonia and pneumothorax detection methods. Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), F1-score, and the area under curve (AUC) are reported for comparison. SGD is the abbreviation for stochastic gradient descent, ReLu for rectified linear unit, lr for learning rate, and AF for activation function
| Method | Optimizer | AF | LR Scheduling | Images size | Pre-processing step | Dataset | Technique | DSC | F1-Score | AUC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DL [ | Adam | Sigmoid | lr = 0.001 that is decreased by factor of 10 when validation loss is not improved | 224 | Image normalization | CXR-14 | DenseNet-121, transfer learning | – | 43.5 | – |
| DL [ | SGD | – | lr = 0.00105 | 512 | Random scaling, shift in coordinate space, brightness and contrast adjustment, blurring with Gaussian blur | RSNA | ResNet50, ResNet101, mask-RCNN, data augmentation | – | – | – |
| DL [ | Gradient Descent | ReLu, Softmax | lr = 0.0003 | 224 | Image resize and augmentation | Kaggle [ | AlexNet, ResNet-18, DenseNet-201, SqueezeNet, transfer learning, data augmentation, cross-validation | – | 93.5 | 95.0 |
| DL [ | Adam | – | lr = 0.00001 with learning rate decrease factor of 0.2 | 512 | Image resizing and data augmentation techniques such as scaling, shear and rotation | CXR-14 | single-shot detector RetinaNet with Se-ResNext101, cross-validation | – | – | – |
| DL [ | – | ReLu, Softmax | lr = 0.00001 | 227 | Image resizing | CXR-14 | VGG-19, CWT, DWT, GLCM, transfer learning, SVM-linear, SVM-RBF, KNN classifier, RF, DT | – | 92.15 | – |
| DL [ | Adam | ReLu, Sigmoid | lr = 0.001 with | 224 | Image normalization, resizing, cropping and data augmentation | CheXpert | DenseNet-122, transfer learning | – | – | 70.8 |
| DL [ | Adam | ReLu, Softmax | lr = 0.0005 with | 768 | Image normalization and data augmentation with random Gamma correction, random brightness and contrast change, CLAHE, motion blur, median blur, horizontal flip, random shift, random scale, and random rotation | SIIM-ACR | UNet, SE-Resnext-101, EfficientNet-B3, transfer learning | 88.0 | – | – |
| DL [ | Adam | ReLu, Sigmoid | lr = 0.001 which is relatively dropped per epoch using the cosine annealing learning rate technique | 256 | Image resizing, normalization and data augmentation using horizontal flip, one of random contrast, random gamma, and random brightness, one of elastic transform, grid distortion, and optical distortion | SIIM-ACR | UNet, ResNet-34, transfer learning, stochastic weight averaging | 83.56 | – | – |
https://www.kaggle.com/c/siim-acr-pneumothorax-segmentation/data
https://www.kaggle.com/c/siim-acr-pneumothorax-segmentation/data
Quantitative comparison of COVID-19 detection methods. Accuracy (Acc.), F1-score, and the area under curve (AUC) are reported for comparison. SGD is the abbreviation for stochastic gradient descent, ReLu for rectified linear unit, lr for learning rate, and AF for activation function
| Method | Optimizer | AF | LR Scheduling | Images size | Pre-processing step | Dataset | Technique | Acc. | F1-Score | AUC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DL [ | Adam | ReLu | lr = 0.0001 | 224 | Image resizing and data augmentation with rotation | COVID-19 | VGG-16, transfer learning | 97.97 | – | – |
| DL [ | Adam | ReLu, Softmax | lr = 0.0001 and it reduces when there is no improvement for continuous three epochs | 224 | Image resizing, scaling, and data augmentation | COVID-19 | EfficientNet-B4, transfer learning, cross-validation | 96.70 | 97.11 | 96.66 |
| DL [ | Adam | LeakyReLU, Softmax | lr = 0.001 | 128 | Image resizing, and data augmentation such as rotation and zoom | COVID-19, Kaggle [ | InceptionNet-V3, XceptionNet, ResNext, transfer learning | 97.0 | 95.0 | – |
| DL [ | Adam | ReLu | lr = 0.00001 with rate decay of 0.1 | 224 | Image resizing and data augmentation | COVID-19, Kermany [ | SE-ResNext-50, transfer learning | 97.55 | – | – |
| DL [ | Adam | ReLu | lr = 0.0001 | 224 | Image resizing, normalization, and data augmentation technique such as random rotation, width shift, height shift, horizontal flip | COVID-19, Kaggle[ | VGG16, ResNet50, EfficientNetB0, synthetic image generation, cross-validation | 96.8 | – | – |
| DL [ | Adam | – | lr = 0.0001 | 512 | Image normalization and resizing | CheXpert, Private | DenseNet-121, PCAM, Vision Transformer | 86.4 | – | 94.1 |
| DL [ | Adam | ReLu, Softmax | lr = 0.000001 for 20 epochs and then 0.0000001 | 224 | Image resizing, normalization and data augmentation | COVID-19, RSNA, CheXpert, MC | ResNeXt-50, Inception-v3, DenseNet-161, transfer learning | 98.1 | – | – |
Quantitative comparison of multi-class disease classification. Area under curve (AUC) is reported for comparison. SGD is the abbreviation for stochastic gradient descent, ReLu for rectified linear unit, lr for learning rate, and AF for activation function
| Method | LR Scheduling | Optimizer | AF | Image size | Pre-processing step | Dataset | Technique | AUC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DL [ | lr = 0.0001 and a decay of 0.00001 over each update | Adam | Sigmoid | 224 | Images are resized and horizontally flipped | CXR-14 | DenseNet-121, CAM, UNet architecture | 81.5 |
| DL [ | – | SGD | – | 1024 | Image are resized and intensity ranges are rescaled | CXR-14 | ResNet-50, AlexNet, GoogLeNet, VGG-16, transfer learning | 69.62 |
| DL [ | lr = 0.1 | – | Sigmoid | 512 | Image are downsampled using bilinear interpolation | CXR-14 | ResNet, AM, CAM, knowledge preservation | – |
| DL [ | lr = 0.001 and is reduced by factor of 10 when validation loss not improved | Adam | ReLu, Sigmoid | 256 | Images are resized using the bilinear interpolation | CXR-14, PLCO | DenseNet, spatial knowledge, lung segmentation | 88.3 |
| DL [ | lr = 0.01 and is divided by 10 after 20 epochs | SGD | Sigmoid | 224 | Images are resized, cropped, and horizontally flipped. ImageNet mean is also subtracted from the image | CXR-14 | ResNet-50, DenseNet-121, AG-CNN. AG-Mask Interface | 87.1 |
| DL [ | lr = 0.0001 | Adam | Softmax | 224 | Images are resized using the bilinear interpolation and are also horizontally flipped | CXR-14 | ResNet-18, Transfer learning, CAM, Data augmentation | 84.94 |
| DL [ | lr = 0.00005 | SGD | Sigmoid | 1024 | Images are resized using the bilinear interpolation and additional techniques such as rotation, zoom and shifting are performed for data augmentation | AMC, SNUBH | ResNet-50, fine-tuning, CAM, curriculum learning | 98.3 |
| DL [ | lr = 0.0001 | Adam | ReLu, Sigmoid | 128 | Images are normalized to enhance the contrast. Further, rotation, scaling and flipping is performed for reducing the overfitting | CXR-14 | Inception-ResNet-v2, dilated ResNet, transfer Learning, cross-validation | 90.0 |
| DL [ | lr = 0.0001 and it is decreased by 10 times after every 3 epochs | Adam | Softmax, Sigmoid | 224 | Images normalization is performed | CXR-14 | ResNet-18, DenseNet-121, MSML | 84.32 |
| DL [ | – | – | – | 236 | Images are resized, cropped, flipped and rotated | MURA, CheXpert, CXR-14 | ResNet-50, DenseNet-121, one cycle training, transfer learning | 80.0 |
| DL [ | lr = 0.001 and is reduced by factor of 10 when validation loss not improved | Adam | Sigmoid | 1024 | Images in PLCO dataset are resized | CXR-14, PLCO | DenseNet-121, transfer learning | 84.1 |
| DL [ | lr = 0.0001 and is reduced by factor of 10 when validation loss not improved | Adam | ReLu, Sigmoid | 512 | Image are resized, cropped, and horizontally flipped for augmentation | CXR-14 | DenseNet-121, SE, multi-map layer, max–min pooling | 83.0 |
| DL [ | – | Adam | ReLu, Sigmoid | 224 | Images are resized and data augmentation is performed | CXR-14 | MobileNet-V2, transfer learning | 80.99 |
| DL [ | lr = 0.01, 0.001 and is reduced by a factor of 2 when validation loss not improve | Adam | Sigmoid | 256 | Image resizing and data augmentation techniques such as rotation and flipping | CXR-14 | ResNet-38, ResNet-50, ResNet-101, MLP, transfer learning | 82.2 |
Fig. 7GAN Architecture
Quantitative comparison of segmentation and classification methods using GAN models. Accuracy, area under curve (AUC), and dice similarity coefficient (DSC) are reported for comparison. SGD is the abbreviation for stochastic gradient descent, ReLu for rectified linear unit, lr for learning rate, and AF for activation function
| Method | Optimizer | AF | LR Scheduling | Images size | Dataset | Pre-processing step | Technique | Accuracy | AUC | DSC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DL [ | Adam | ReLu, Leaky ReLU | lr = 0.001 | 1204 | CXR-14 | Data augmentation | CycleGAN, VGG-16, ResNet, JRS | – | – | 88.9 |
| DL [ | Adam | – | lr = 0.002 which is reduced after every 100 epochs | 512 | MC, JSRT | Image resizing and rescaling | Semantic aware GAN, ResNet-101, dilated convolutions | – | – | 94.5 |
| DL [ | – | ReLu | lr = 0.01 | 400 | MC, JSRT | Image resizing | Residual FCN, Critic FCN | – | – | 97.3 |
| DL [ | Adam, Nesterov | – | lr = 0.0004 with | 128 | JSRT | Image resizing | DCGAN, UNet architecture | – | – | 94.6 |
| DL [ | Adam | ReLu, Leaky ReLu | lr = 0.0002 and decay rate of 0.5 | 256 | MC, Shenzhen, JSRT | Image resizing | Skip connections, conditional GAN, pixel GAN, patch GAN | – | – | 97.4 |
| DL [ | SGD | ReLu | – | 512 | MC, Shenzhen, JSRT | Image resizing, histogram equalization | Attention UNet, Critic FCN, Focal Tversky Loss | – | – | 97.5 |
| DL [ | Adam | ReLu | lr = 0.00001 | 128 | MC, Shenzhen, JSRT | Image resizing and normalization | Adversarial Pyramid Progressive Attention UNet, KL divergence with Tversky loss | 75.8 | – | 97.6 |
| DL [ | – | Leaky ReLu | – | 128 | PLCO, Indiana | Image resizing | GAN, CNN | 93.7 | – | – |
| DL [ | Adam | Softmax | lr = 0.0002 for first 100 epochs | 512 | RSNA | Image resizing | ResNet-18, ResNet-50, CycleGAN, semantic modeling | 93.1 | 96.3 | – |
| DL [ | Adam | Leaky ReLu | lr = 0.0005 | 64 | CXR-14 | Image resizing and no augmentation is performed | GAN, U-Net autoencoder, CNN discriminator, One class learning | – | 84.1 | – |
| DL [ | Adam | ReLu, Leaky Relu | lr = 0.0002 with | 112 | COVID-19 | Image resizing and normalization | VGG-16, Auxiliary Classifier Generative Adversarial Network, PCA | 95.0 | – | – |
https://www.kaggle.com/c/rsna-pneumonia-detection-challenge/data