A comparison of algorithms and humans for mitosis detection

A. Giusti, Claudio Caccia, D. Ciresan, J. Schmidhuber, L. Gambardella
{"title":"A comparison of algorithms and humans for mitosis detection","authors":"A. Giusti, Claudio Caccia, D. Ciresan, J. Schmidhuber, L. Gambardella","doi":"10.1109/ISBI.2014.6868130","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We consider the problem of detecting mitotic figures in breast cancer histology slides. We investigate whether the performance of state-of-the-art detection algorithms is comparable to the performance of humans, when they are compared under fair conditions: our test subjects were not previously exposed to the task, and were required to learn their own classification criteria solely by studying the same training set available to algorithms. We designed and implemented a standardized web-based test based on the publicly-available MITOS dataset, and compared results with the performance of the 6 top-scoring algorithms in the ICPR 2012 Mitosis Detection Contest. The problem is presented as a classification task on a balanced dataset. 45 different test subjects produced a total of 3009 classifications. The best individual (accuracy = 0.859 ± 0.012), is outperformed by the most accurate algorithm (accuracy = 0.873 ± 0.004). This suggests that state-of-the-art detection algorithms are likely limited by the size of the training set, rather than by lack of generalization ability.","PeriodicalId":440405,"journal":{"name":"2014 IEEE 11th International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI)","volume":"32 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"22","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2014 IEEE 11th International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ISBI.2014.6868130","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 22

Abstract

We consider the problem of detecting mitotic figures in breast cancer histology slides. We investigate whether the performance of state-of-the-art detection algorithms is comparable to the performance of humans, when they are compared under fair conditions: our test subjects were not previously exposed to the task, and were required to learn their own classification criteria solely by studying the same training set available to algorithms. We designed and implemented a standardized web-based test based on the publicly-available MITOS dataset, and compared results with the performance of the 6 top-scoring algorithms in the ICPR 2012 Mitosis Detection Contest. The problem is presented as a classification task on a balanced dataset. 45 different test subjects produced a total of 3009 classifications. The best individual (accuracy = 0.859 ± 0.012), is outperformed by the most accurate algorithm (accuracy = 0.873 ± 0.004). This suggests that state-of-the-art detection algorithms are likely limited by the size of the training set, rather than by lack of generalization ability.
有丝分裂检测算法与人类的比较
我们考虑在乳腺癌组织学切片中检测有丝分裂象的问题。我们调查了最先进的检测算法的性能是否与人类的性能相当,当他们在公平的条件下进行比较时:我们的测试对象以前没有接触过任务,并且被要求仅通过研究算法可用的相同训练集来学习他们自己的分类标准。我们基于公开的MITOS数据集设计并实现了一个标准化的基于网络的测试,并将结果与ICPR 2012有丝分裂检测竞赛中得分最高的6种算法的性能进行了比较。该问题以平衡数据集上的分类任务的形式呈现。45个不同的测试科目总共产生了3009个分类。最佳个体(准确率= 0.859±0.012)优于最精确算法(准确率= 0.873±0.004)。这表明,最先进的检测算法可能受到训练集大小的限制,而不是缺乏泛化能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信