| Literature DB >> 35790588 |
R Rajeswari1, Veerraju Gampala2, Balajee Maram3, R Cristin4.
Abstract
Coronavirus (COVID-19) creates an extensive range of respiratory contagions, and it is a kind of ribonucleic acid (RNA) virus, which affects both animals and humans. Moreover, COVID-19 is a new disease, which produces contamination in upper respiration alterritory and lungs. The new COVID is a rapidly spreading pathogen globally, and it threatens billions of humans' lives. However, it is significant to identify positive cases in order to avoid the spread of plague and to speedily treat infected patients. Hence, in this paper, the WSCA-based RMDL approach is devised for COVID-19 prediction by means of chest X-ray images. Moreover, Fuzzy Weighted Local Information C-Means (FWLICM) approach is devised in order to segment lung lobes. The developed FWLICM method is designed by modifying the Fuzzy Local Information C-Means (FLICM) technique. Additionally, random multimodel deep learning (RMDL) classifier is utilized for the COVID-19 prediction process. The new optimization approach, named water sine cosine algorithm (WSCA), is devised in order to obtain an effective prediction. The developed WSCA is newly designed by incorporating sine cosine algorithm (SCA) and water cycle algorithm (WCA). The developed WSCA-driven RMDL approach outperforms other COVID-19 prediction techniques with regard to accuracy, specificity, sensitivity, and dice score of 92.41%, 93.55%, 92.14%, and 90.02%.Entities:
Keywords: COVID; Fuzzy local information c-means clustering; Random multimodel deep learning; Sine cosine algorithm; Water cycle algorithm
Year: 2022 PMID: 35790588 PMCID: PMC9255540 DOI: 10.1007/s10278-022-00667-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Digit Imaging ISSN: 0897-1889 Impact factor: 4.903
Fig. 1Block diagram of the developed COVID-19 prediction using the developed WSCA-based RMDL algorithm
Fig. 2Architecture of RMDL classifier
Experimental setup
| Batch size | 128 |
| Embedding dimension | 50 |
| Hidden layers of DNN | 8 |
| Hidden layers of RNN | 5 |
| Hidden layers of CNN | 10 |
| Number of iteration | 100 |
| Population size | 10 |
Fig. 3Experimental outcomes of the developed WSCA-based RMDL a input image 1, 3, and 4 with non-COVID and input image-2 with COVID, b pre-processed image of input image 1, 2, 3, and 4, and c segmentation image of input image 1, 2, 3, and 4
Performance analysis of WSCA-driven RMDL by shifting training data percentage with various epoch size
| 81.37 | 82.30 | 84.15 | 87.00 | 88.07 | |
| 81.40 | 83.12 | 84.57 | 87.10 | 88.71 | |
| 82.43 | 83.76 | 84.65 | 87.23 | 89.99 | |
| 83.10 | 84.03 | 85.90 | 87.97 | 90.25 | |
| 84.64 | 85.36 | 86.76 | 88.35 | 91.64 | |
| 84.69 | 86.10 | 86.91 | 88.78 | 92.03 | |
| 84.53 | 85.02 | 85.18 | 86.83 | 89.34 | |
| 85.12 | 85.26 | 87.26 | 87.36 | 90.66 | |
| 85.79 | 85.82 | 88.47 | 88.65 | 92.37 | |
| 85.84 | 86.60 | 89.00 | 92.35 | 92.70 | |
| 86.08 | 86.75 | 90.23 | 92.39 | 93.74 | |
| 87.71 | 91.03 | 92.25 | 92.85 | 94.35 | |
| 79.37 | 80.77 | 83.27 | 84.62 | 86.10 | |
| 79.73 | 83.43 | 84.36 | 85.10 | 86.18 | |
| 81.13 | 83.49 | 84.68 | 85.44 | 86.98 | |
| 81.15 | 83.52 | 84.77 | 85.45 | 87.74 | |
| 82.03 | 84.02 | 85.02 | 85.88 | 88.12 | |
| 82.73 | 84.54 | 85.81 | 87.01 | 90.19 | |
| 81.02 | 82.37 | 83.44 | 83.95 | 84.11 | |
| 81.73 | 82.40 | 84.60 | 86.43 | 89.00 | |
| 81.83 | 82.87 | 84.66 | 86.69 | 89.18 | |
| 82.15 | 83.80 | 84.85 | 86.88 | 89.54 | |
| 82.84 | 84.24 | 86.38 | 87.45 | 90.44 | |
| 83.74 | 84.49 | 86.55 | 89.42 | 90.56 | |
The training data, K-fold, and TPR values are represented in bold font
Performance analysis of WSCA enabled RMDL by shifting k-fold value
| 82.33 | 83.27 | 84.17 | 86.30 | 87.67 | |
| 82.47 | 84.59 | 85.99 | 87.44 | 88.51 | |
| 83.40 | 85.50 | 86.50 | 88.13 | 89.66 | |
| 84.28 | 85.57 | 86.58 | 88.72 | 89.79 | |
| 84.42 | 86.26 | 86.64 | 89.10 | 90.88 | |
| 84.49 | 86.44 | 88.84 | 89.99 | 92.06 | |
| 82.87 | 84.54 | 84.62 | 85.96 | 86.25 | |
| 83.70 | 84.82 | 85.27 | 86.14 | 88.12 | |
| 83.92 | 84.98 | 85.30 | 86.15 | 88.39 | |
| 84.01 | 85.09 | 85.80 | 86.76 | 88.77 | |
| 84.75 | 85.56 | 86.76 | 88.23 | 88.84 | |
| 84.88 | 86.24 | 88.62 | 88.98 | 91.27 | |
| 78.24 | 80.33 | 81.81 | 82.77 | 84.71 | |
| 78.86 | 81.30 | 82.26 | 84.55 | 84.80 | |
| 79.98 | 82.32 | 82.45 | 84.66 | 85.68 | |
| 80.64 | 82.40 | 83.23 | 85.63 | 86.11 | |
| 80.78 | 83.55 | 84.43 | 86.23 | 87.10 | |
| 83.31 | 84.13 | 85.03 | 86.55 | 88.02 | |
| 82.23 | 83.73 | 84.69 | 85.44 | 87.03 | |
| 82.26 | 83.78 | 85.68 | 85.82 | 87.48 | |
| 82.87 | 83.80 | 85.84 | 86.26 | 88.75 | |
| 84.21 | 84.73 | 86.15 | 87.75 | 89.61 | |
| 84.80 | 85.11 | 86.86 | 88.74 | 89.71 | |
| 85.12 | 85.67 | 88.46 | 89.53 | 90.97 | |
The training data, K-fold, and TPR values are represented in bold font
ROC performance analysis for the developed WSCA-based RMDL
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 83.37 | 83.77 | 84.26 | 82.01 | 85.62 | 89.18 | |
| 86.11 | 86.37 | 86.97 | 86.13 | 89.05 | 90.60 | |
| 87.40 | 88.45 | 89.23 | 91.23 | 91.16 | 93.74 | |
| 87.61 | 88.69 | 93.16 | 89.71 | 94.02 | 94.86 | |
| 91.54 | 93.19 | 94.30 | 91.31 | 94.44 | 95.40 | |
| 92.87 | 93.55 | 94.81 | 93.17 | 96.63 | 97.15 | |
| 93.30 | 93.93 | 95.85 | 94.31 | 97.38 | 97.74 | |
| 93.76 | 94.05 | 98.39 | 96.88 | 98.67 | 98.72 | |
| 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
The training data, K-fold, and TPR values are represented in bold font
Analysis of the devised WSCA-driven RMDL based on training percentage
| 76.24 | 78.67 | 80.82 | 82.2 | 84.53 | 87.08 | |
| 77.36 | 80.50 | 81.64 | 82.3 | 85.45 | 88.12 | |
| 78.05 | 80.60 | 83.38 | 84.0 | 85.71 | 88.42 | |
| 78.92 | 81.93 | 83.47 | 84.5 | 85.83 | 88.88 | |
| 80.19 | 81.97 | 83.57 | 85.2 | 86.74 | 89.94 | |
| 81.68 | 82.94 | 83.86 | 86.3 | 88.08 | 90.60 | |
| 77.83 | 79.62 | 83.17 | 83.5 | 83.84 | 89.93 | |
| 78.20 | 81.82 | 83.65 | 84.1 | 85.65 | 90.10 | |
| 80.26 | 82.79 | 83.95 | 85.3 | 87.31 | 91.46 | |
| 80.59 | 83.11 | 83.99 | 85.8 | 87.57 | 91.85 | |
| 80.97 | 83.46 | 84.54 | 86.4 | 88.77 | 92.35 | |
| 82.68 | 84.46 | 85.26 | 87.3 | 90.46 | 93.55 | |
| 76.31 | 76.75 | 79.70 | 80.2 | 80.75 | 85.63 | |
| 76.45 | 78.18 | 80.54 | 81.3 | 82.77 | 87.22 | |
| 77.37 | 78.27 | 81.33 | 82.4 | 86.03 | 89.39 | |
| 77.44 | 78.45 | 81.34 | 83.3 | 86.27 | 90.71 | |
| 77.58 | 79.35 | 82.88 | 84.1 | 86.70 | 91.55 | |
| 79.18 | 80.34 | 85.10 | 86.3 | 87.18 | 91.55 | |
| 75.74 | 76.71 | 79.38 | 81.61 | 82.27 | 86.60 | |
| 75.94 | 79.12 | 79.49 | 81.74 | 82.99 | 86.63 | |
| 76.50 | 79.12 | 81.45 | 83.21 | 84.07 | 87.10 | |
| 77.07 | 79.25 | 81.92 | 83.64 | 84.12 | 88.40 | |
| 77.89 | 80.13 | 82.77 | 84.12 | 85.14 | 89.20 | |
| 78.05 | 80.69 | 83.76 | 84.62 | 87.34 | 89.99 | |
The training data, K-fold, and TPR values are represented in bold font
Comparative analysis of the designed WSCA-driven RMDL based on k-fold
| 75.27 | 78.80 | 81.36 | 81.4 | 81.57 | 84.21 | |
| 76.53 | 78.87 | 82.31 | 83.6 | 86.04 | 89.23 | |
| 76.95 | 80.26 | 82.49 | 84.1 | 86.68 | 89.36 | |
| 78.13 | 81.17 | 83.30 | 85.1 | 87.15 | 90.20 | |
| 80.70 | 82.94 | 85.87 | 86.5 | 88.60 | 90.74 | |
| 82.59 | 84.43 | 87.98 | 89.1 | 90.48 | 92.41 | |
| 76.56 | 81.55 | 82.86 | 83.0 | 83.23 | 85.63 | |
| 76.60 | 83.36 | 84.20 | 84.3 | 84.42 | 85.94 | |
| 77.98 | 83.67 | 84.36 | 85.0 | 85.40 | 86.14 | |
| 78.46 | 83.91 | 85.79 | 86.0 | 86.32 | 90.80 | |
| 78.52 | 83.98 | 86.72 | 87.1 | 87.28 | 91.07 | |
| 82.23 | 85.22 | 87.97 | 88.2 | 88.46 | 92.58 | |
| 74.93 | 77.61 | 83.08 | 83.51 | 84.19 | 84.81 | |
| 75.03 | 77.98 | 83.22 | 84.61 | 85.53 | 87.83 | |
| 75.72 | 78.06 | 83.75 | 85.41 | 87.29 | 88.62 | |
| 76.79 | 79.22 | 84.38 | 85.63 | 87.71 | 89.45 | |
| 77.26 | 79.31 | 84.88 | 86.21 | 88.02 | 89.78 | |
| 78.75 | 80.49 | 86.49 | 87.23 | 89.07 | 92.14 | |
| 74.37 | 76.04 | 79.87 | 80.12 | 81.14 | 85.77 | |
| 74.42 | 76.69 | 80.71 | 81.33 | 82.06 | 87.48 | |
| 74.49 | 77.08 | 80.80 | 81.54 | 82.11 | 88.70 | |
| 75.82 | 77.76 | 81.44 | 81.67 | 82.59 | 89.54 | |
| 76.78 | 80.10 | 82.71 | 83.23 | 84.85 | 91.39 | |
| 79.39 | 80.70 | 83.98 | 85.34 | 88.22 | 92.02 | |
The training data, K-fold, and TPR values are represented in bold font
ROC comparative analysis for the developed WSCA-based RMDL
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| 75.32 | 76.58 | 81.54 | 82.01 | 82.65 | 82.66 | |
| 77.57 | 79.99 | 85.01 | 86.13 | 88.95 | 91.00 | |
| 79.82 | 81.17 | 89.33 | 91.23 | 92.78 | 93.84 | |
| 83.24 | 85.71 | 89.81 | 89.71 | 88.93 | 95.70 | |
| 86.21 | 87.97 | 90.31 | 91.31 | 92.86 | 94.32 | |
| 89.26 | 90.25 | 92.46 | 93.17 | 95.78 | 96.59 | |
| 90.80 | 91.06 | 93.56 | 94.31 | 95.36 | 97.45 | |
| 91.28 | 94.06 | 96.56 | 96.88 | 97.67 | 99.45 | |
| 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
The training data, K-fold, and TPR values are represented in bold font
Comparative discussion
| 81.68 | 82.94 | 83.86 | 86.3 | 88.08 | 90.60 | ||
| 82.68 | 84.46 | 85.26 | 87.3 | 90.46 | |||
| 79.18 | 80.34 | 85.10 | 86.3 | 87.18 | 91.95 | ||
| 78.05 | 80.69 | 83.76 | 84.62 | 87.34 | 89.99 | ||
| 82.59 | 84.43 | 87.98 | 89.1 | 90.48 | |||
| 82.23 | 85.22 | 87.97 | 88.2 | 88.46 | 92.58 | ||
| 78.75 | 80.49 | 86.49 | 87.23 | 89.07 | |||
| 79.39 | 80.70 | 83.98 | 85.34 | 88.22 |
The better performance results are represented using bold fonts
Computational time
| Computational time (sec) | 325 | 310 | 288 | 256 | 241 |
The better performance results are represented using bold fonts
| Sl. No | Pseudo code of the introduced WSCA |
|---|---|
| 1 | |
| 2 | |
| 3 | Start |
| 4 | Initialize populace of rain drop, sea and river |
| 5 | Compute the fitness measure |
| 6 | Evaluate the price of every rain drop using expression ( |
| 7 | Establish the strength of flow for rivers and sea using Eq. ( |
| 8 | Stream flow to river is performed using expression ( |
| 9 | River flow to sea is carried out through expression ( |
| 10 | Replace the location of river and sea |
| 11 | Verify evaporation state |
| 12 | If |
| 13 | Perform training procedure by means of expression ( |
| 14 | |
| 15 | Replace user defined parameter |
| 16 | Verify the possibility of solution |
| 17 |