| Literature DB >> 35765410 |
Yong Zhang1,2, Li Su1,2, Zhenxing Liu1,2, Wei Tan3, Yinuo Jiang4, Cheng Cheng4.
Abstract
COVID-19 has spread rapidly all over the world and has infected more than 200 countries and regions. Early screening of suspected infected patients is essential for preventing and combating COVID-19. Computed Tomography (CT) is a fast and efficient tool which can quickly provide chest scan results. To reduce the burden on doctors of reading CTs, in this article, a high precision diagnosis algorithm of COVID-19 from chest CTs is designed for intelligent diagnosis. A semi-supervised learning approach is developed to solve the problem when only small amount of labelled data is available. While following the MixMatch rules to conduct sophisticated data augmentation, we introduce a model training technique to reduce the risk of model over-fitting. At the same time, a new data enhancement method is proposed to modify the regularization term in MixMatch. To further enhance the generalization of the model, a convolutional neural network based on an attention mechanism is then developed that enables to extract multi-scale features on CT scans. The proposed algorithm is evaluated on an independent CT dataset of the chest from COVID-19 and achieves the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) value of 0.932, accuracy of 90.1%, sensitivity of 91.4%, specificity of 88.9%, and F1-score of 89.9%. The results show that the proposed algorithm can accurately diagnose whether a chest CT belongs to a positive or negative indication of COVID-19, and can help doctors to diagnose rapidly in the early stages of a COVID-19 outbreak.Entities:
Keywords: Attention mechanisms; COVID-19; Computed tomography; Deep learning; Semi-supervised learning
Year: 2022 PMID: 35765410 PMCID: PMC9221925 DOI: 10.1016/j.neucom.2022.06.076
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Neurocomputing ISSN: 0925-2312 Impact factor: 5.779
Fig. 1Examples of (a) COVID-19 infections and (b) non-infected CT images as shown in the left and the right column respectively.
Fig. 4The proposed method includes two stages: 1) a small number of labelled samples and a large number of unlabelled samples are used to generate new samples by semi-supervised learning which are sent to the network for training. 2) We train the two models with mixed images and labelled images respectively, and use the ensemble learning to integrate predictions from the two trained networks.
Fig. 2Framework overview of proposed CAMMix.
Fig. 3Comparison results of CAMMix, Mixup, and CutMix.
Fig. 5Overview of Attention module.
Details of the labelled dataset and unlabelled dataset.
| Dataset | Labelled | Unlabelled | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Training | Validation | Test | Training | |
| COVID-19 | 191 | 60 | 93 | 500 |
| Normal | 234 | 58 | 99 | 500 |
| Total | ||||
Performance of SSL and attention modules in the ablation studies.
| Method | AUC | Accuracy | Sensitivity | Specificity | F1-score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DenseNet121 | 0.846 | 0.776 | 0.753 | 0.798 | 0.765 |
| DenseNet121 + Attention | 0.853 | 0.807 | 0.796 | 0.818 | 0.800 |
| DenseNet121 + SSL | 0.867 | 0.792 | 0.742 | 0.838 | 0.775 |
| ResNet50 | 0.835 | 0.786 | 0.742 | 0.828 | 0.771 |
| ResNet50 + Attention | 0.841 | 0.791 | 0.760 | 0.823 | 0.785 |
| ResNet50 + SSL | 0.882 | 0.802 | 0.774 | 0.828 | 0.791 |
Fig. 6Performance of SSL and attention modules in the ablation studies.
Fig. 7The receiver operating characteristic curve of binary classification between COVID-19 and Normal.
Fig. 8The confusion matrix of the binary classification task.
Comparison of classification result of different algorithms on testset.
| Method | AUC | Accuracy | F1-score |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mean teacher | 0.869 | 0.802 | 0.808 |
| ICT | 0.884 | 0.860 | 0.863 |
| VAT | 0.873 | 0.813 | 0.824 |
| Self-Trans | 0.860 | 0.850 | |
| 0.932 |
Fig. 9Performance of the proposed method and other algorithms.
Fig. 10Grad-CAM visualizations for baseline and the proposed method.
| 1: Initialization parameters number of augmentations |
| 2: Batch of labelled samples |
| 3: Batch of unlabelled samples |
| 4: |
| 5: |
| 6: |
| 7: |
| 8: |
| 9: |
| 10: |
| 11: |
| 12: |
| 13: |
| 14: |
| 15: |
| 16: |
| 17: pass |
| 18: |
| 19: |
| 20: |
| 21: update |
| 22: |
| 23: return |
| 24: Using ensemble learning to get the sample’s final prediction: by using Eq. |