自动与专家设计的机器学习模型在年龄相关性黄斑变性检测和分类中的比较分析。

Q3 Medicine
Ceren Durmaz Engin, Ufuk Beşenk, Denizcan Özizmirliler, Mustafa Alper Selver
{"title":"自动与专家设计的机器学习模型在年龄相关性黄斑变性检测和分类中的比较分析。","authors":"Ceren Durmaz Engin, Ufuk Beşenk, Denizcan Özizmirliler, Mustafa Alper Selver","doi":"10.4274/tjo.galenos.2025.74780","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To compare the effectiveness of expert-designed machine learning models and code-free automated machine learning (AutoML) models in classifying optical coherence tomography (OCT) images for detecting age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and distinguishing between its dry and wet forms.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Custom models were developed by an artificial intelligence expert using the EfficientNet V2 architecture, while AutoML models were created by an ophthalmologist utilizing LobeAI with transfer learning via ResNet-50 V2. Both models were designed to differentiate normal OCT images from AMD and to also distinguish between dry and wet AMD. The models were trained and tested using an 80:20 split, with each diagnostic group containing 500 OCT images. Performance metrics, including sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and F1 scores, were calculated and compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The expert-designed model achieved an overall accuracy of 99.67% for classifying all images, with F1 scores of 0.99 or higher across all binary class comparisons. In contrast, the AutoML model achieved an overall accuracy of 89.00%, with F1 scores ranging from 0.86 to 0.90 in binary comparisons. Notably lower recall was observed for dry AMD vs. normal (0.85) in the AutoML model, indicating challenges in correctly identifying dry AMD.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While the AutoML models demonstrated acceptable performance in identifying and classifying AMD cases, the expert-designed models significantly outperformed them. The use of advanced neural network architectures and rigorous optimization in the expert-developed models underscores the continued necessity of expert involvement in the development of high-precision diagnostic tools for medical image classification.</p>","PeriodicalId":23373,"journal":{"name":"Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology","volume":"55 3","pages":"120-126"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12192190/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Analysis of Automated vs. Expert-Designed Machine Learning Models in Age-Related Macular Degeneration Detection and Classification.\",\"authors\":\"Ceren Durmaz Engin, Ufuk Beşenk, Denizcan Özizmirliler, Mustafa Alper Selver\",\"doi\":\"10.4274/tjo.galenos.2025.74780\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To compare the effectiveness of expert-designed machine learning models and code-free automated machine learning (AutoML) models in classifying optical coherence tomography (OCT) images for detecting age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and distinguishing between its dry and wet forms.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Custom models were developed by an artificial intelligence expert using the EfficientNet V2 architecture, while AutoML models were created by an ophthalmologist utilizing LobeAI with transfer learning via ResNet-50 V2. Both models were designed to differentiate normal OCT images from AMD and to also distinguish between dry and wet AMD. The models were trained and tested using an 80:20 split, with each diagnostic group containing 500 OCT images. Performance metrics, including sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and F1 scores, were calculated and compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The expert-designed model achieved an overall accuracy of 99.67% for classifying all images, with F1 scores of 0.99 or higher across all binary class comparisons. In contrast, the AutoML model achieved an overall accuracy of 89.00%, with F1 scores ranging from 0.86 to 0.90 in binary comparisons. Notably lower recall was observed for dry AMD vs. normal (0.85) in the AutoML model, indicating challenges in correctly identifying dry AMD.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While the AutoML models demonstrated acceptable performance in identifying and classifying AMD cases, the expert-designed models significantly outperformed them. The use of advanced neural network architectures and rigorous optimization in the expert-developed models underscores the continued necessity of expert involvement in the development of high-precision diagnostic tools for medical image classification.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23373,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology\",\"volume\":\"55 3\",\"pages\":\"120-126\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12192190/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4274/tjo.galenos.2025.74780\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4274/tjo.galenos.2025.74780","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:比较专家设计的机器学习模型和无代码自动机器学习(AutoML)模型在光学相干断层扫描(OCT)图像分类中用于检测年龄相关性黄斑变性(AMD)并区分其干型和湿型的有效性。材料和方法:自定义模型由人工智能专家使用EfficientNet V2架构开发,AutoML模型由眼科医生使用LobeAI通过ResNet-50 V2迁移学习创建。这两种模型都被设计用于区分正常OCT图像和AMD,以及干湿AMD。使用80:20的分割对模型进行训练和测试,每个诊断组包含500张OCT图像。计算和比较性能指标,包括敏感性、特异性、准确性和F1评分。结果:专家设计的模型对所有图像进行分类的总体准确率为99.67%,在所有二值类比较中F1得分为0.99或更高。相比之下,AutoML模型的总体准确率为89.00%,在二值比较中F1得分在0.86到0.90之间。在AutoML模型中,干性AMD的召回率明显低于正常(0.85),这表明在正确识别干性AMD方面存在挑战。结论:虽然AutoML模型在识别和分类AMD病例方面表现出可接受的性能,但专家设计的模型明显优于它们。在专家开发的模型中使用先进的神经网络架构和严格的优化,强调了专家参与医学图像分类高精度诊断工具开发的持续必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparative Analysis of Automated vs. Expert-Designed Machine Learning Models in Age-Related Macular Degeneration Detection and Classification.

Objectives: To compare the effectiveness of expert-designed machine learning models and code-free automated machine learning (AutoML) models in classifying optical coherence tomography (OCT) images for detecting age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and distinguishing between its dry and wet forms.

Materials and methods: Custom models were developed by an artificial intelligence expert using the EfficientNet V2 architecture, while AutoML models were created by an ophthalmologist utilizing LobeAI with transfer learning via ResNet-50 V2. Both models were designed to differentiate normal OCT images from AMD and to also distinguish between dry and wet AMD. The models were trained and tested using an 80:20 split, with each diagnostic group containing 500 OCT images. Performance metrics, including sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and F1 scores, were calculated and compared.

Results: The expert-designed model achieved an overall accuracy of 99.67% for classifying all images, with F1 scores of 0.99 or higher across all binary class comparisons. In contrast, the AutoML model achieved an overall accuracy of 89.00%, with F1 scores ranging from 0.86 to 0.90 in binary comparisons. Notably lower recall was observed for dry AMD vs. normal (0.85) in the AutoML model, indicating challenges in correctly identifying dry AMD.

Conclusion: While the AutoML models demonstrated acceptable performance in identifying and classifying AMD cases, the expert-designed models significantly outperformed them. The use of advanced neural network architectures and rigorous optimization in the expert-developed models underscores the continued necessity of expert involvement in the development of high-precision diagnostic tools for medical image classification.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology
Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology Medicine-Ophthalmology
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology (TJO) is the only scientific periodical publication of the Turkish Ophthalmological Association and has been published since January 1929. In its early years, the journal was published in Turkish and French. Although there were temporary interruptions in the publication of the journal due to various challenges, the Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology has been published continually from 1971 to the present. The target audience includes specialists and physicians in training in ophthalmology in all relevant disciplines.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信