| Literature DB >> 35198132 |
S Rinesh1, K Maheswari2, B Arthi3, P Sherubha4, A Vijay5, S Sridhar6, T Rajendran7, Yosef Asrat Waji8.
Abstract
The imaging modalities are used to view other organs and analyze different tissues in the body. In such imaging modalities, a new and developing imaging technique is hyperspectral imaging. This multicolour representation of tissues helps us to better understand the issues compared to the previous image models. This research aims to analyze the tumor localization in the brain by performing different operations on hyperspectral images. The tumor is located using the combination of k-based clustering processes like k-nearest neighbour and k-means clustering. The value of k in both methods is determined using the optimization process called the firefly algorithm. The optimization processes reduce the manual calculation for finding K's optimal value to segment the brain regions. The labelling of the areas of the brain is done using the multilayer feedforward neural network. The proposed technique produced better results than the existing methods like hybrid k-means clustering and parallel k-means clustering by having a higher peak signal-to-noise ratio and a lesser mean absolute error value. The proposed model achieved 96.47% accuracy, 96.32% sensitivity, and 98.24% specificity, which are improved compared to other techniques.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35198132 PMCID: PMC8860516 DOI: 10.1155/2022/2761847
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Healthc Eng ISSN: 2040-2295 Impact factor: 2.682
Figure 1Flowchart for the mapping process.
Firefly algorithm pseudocode.
|
|
| (1) Objective function: |
| (2) Generate an initial population of fireflies |
|
|
| (3) Formulate light intensity |
| (for example, for maximization problems, |
| (4) Define absorption coefficient |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| Vary attractiveness with distance |
| move firefly |
| Evaluate new solutions and update light intensity; |
| |
| |
| |
| Rank fireflies and find the current best; |
| |
| Postprocessing the results and visualization; |
|
|
Figure 2MFNN data flow model.
Figure 3RGB format of HSI image.
Figure 4Noisy image.
Figure 5Preprocessed greyscale image.
Figure 6Postfiltered output.
Performance comparison results.
| Parameters | Parallel | Optimized | SVM with | Hybrid firefly and |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean absolute error value | 75 | 70 | 68 | 65 |
| Peak signal-to-noise ratio | 72 | 75 | 80 | 85 |
Comparison of performance analysis.
| Classifiers | Accuracy | Sensitivity | Specificity |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 94.93 | 94.26 | 94.55 |
| DNN | 95.30 | 94.85 | 97.70 |
| PSO | 95.11 | 94.71 | 97.01 |
| Lagrangian SVM (LSVM) | 93.34 | 91.22 | 96.69 |
| DCNN [ | 94.50 | 95.10 | 95.86 |
| Proposed method | 96.47 | 96.32 | 98.24 |
Figure 7Graphical view of compared performance analysis.