Three stage cervical cancer classifier based on hybrid ensemble learning with modified binary PSO using pretrained neural networks

References

• Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, et al. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of cancer incidence and mortality for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(6):394–424.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Office on Women's Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2018). https://www.womenshealth.gov/cancer/cervical-cancer. Accessed 15 January 2019.
   Google Scholar
• American Cancer Society, Inc. 2018. Available from: https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cervical-cancer/detection-diagnosis-staging/signs-symptoms.html. Accessed 5 January 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Bhatla N, Berek JS, Fredes MC, et al. Revised FIGO staging for carcinoma of the cervix uteri. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2019;145(1):129–135.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitra P, Mitra S, Pal SK. Staging of cervical cancer with soft computing. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2000;47(7):934–940.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bora K, Chowdhury M, Mahanta LB, et al. Pap smear image classification using convolutional neural network. Proceedings of the tenth Indian conference on computer vision, graphics and image processing. NY, USA. New York: ACM. 2016. p. 55:1–55:8. DOI:10.1145/3009977.3010068
   Google Scholar
• Zhang L, Lu L, Nogues I, et al. Deeppap: deep convolutional networks for cervical cells classification. IEEE J Biomed Health Inform. 2017;21(6):1633–1643.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liang P, Shi W, Zhang X. Remote sensing image classification based on stacked denoising autoencoder. Remote Sens. 2018;10(1):1–12.
   Google Scholar
• Gottimukkula VCR. Object classification using stacked autoencoder and convolutional neural network. North Dakota State University; 2016. p. 1–61. Available from: http://hdl.handle.net/10365/25876.
   Google Scholar
• Chen S, Liu H, Zeng X, et al. Image classification based on convolutional denoising sparse autoencoders. Mathematical problem in engineering. 2017; Article ID 5218247, 16 pages. DOI:10.1155/2017/5218247.
   Google Scholar
• Luo W, Li J, Yang J, et al. Convolutional sparse autoencoders for image classification. IEEE Trans Neural Netw Learn Syst. 2018;29(7):3289–3294.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tang XS, Hao K, Wei H, et al. Using line segments to train multi-stream stacked autoencoders for image classification. Pattern Recognit Lett. 2017;94(C):55–61.
   Google Scholar
• Roy SS, Hossain SI, Akhand MAH, et al. A robust system for noisy image classification combining denoising autoencoder and convolutional neural network. Int J Adv Comput Sci Appl. 2018;9(1):224–235.
   Google Scholar
• Zhuo J, Ju L, Zhang X. A hybrid learning model based on auto-encoders. 12th IEEE conference on industrial electronics and applications. Siem Reap; 2017. p. 522–528. DOI:10.1109/ICIEA.2017.8282900.
   Google Scholar
• Wang X, Liu H. A new input variable selection method for soft sensor based on stacked auto-encoders. 2017 IEEE 56th annual conference on decision and control. 2017. VIC; 2017. p. 3324–3329. DOI:10.1109/CDC.2017.8264147.
   Google Scholar
• Arasi MA, El-Horbaty ESM, Salem ABM, et al. Stack auto-encoders approach for malignant melanoma diagnosis in dermoscopy images. Proceedings of the eighth international conference on intelligent computing and information systems. 2017. p. 403–409. DOI:10.1109/INTELCIS.2017.8260079.
   Google Scholar
• Fang T. A novel computer-aided lung cancer detection method based on transfer learning from googlenet and median intensity projections. IEEE international conference on computer and communication engineering technology. 2018. p. 286–290.
   Google Scholar
• Zhong Z, Jin L, Xie Z. High performance offline handwritten chinese character recognition using googlenet and directional feature maps. 13th International conference on document analysis and recognition. 2015. p. 846–850.
   Google Scholar
• Al-qizwini M, Barjasteh I, Al-Qassab H, et al. Deep learning algorithm for autonomous driving using googlenet. IEEE intelligent vehicle symposium. 2017, p. 89–96.
   Google Scholar
• Santos R, Murrieta-Flores P, Calado P, et al. Toponym matching through deep neural networks. Int J Geogr Inf Sci. 2018;32(2):324–348. doi: 10.1080/13658816.2017.1390119
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Almisreb AA, Jamil N, Din MN. Utilizing alexnet deep transfer learning for ear recognition. Proceedings of the 4th international conference on information retrieval and knowledge management. 2018, p. 1–5.
   Google Scholar
• Qassim H, Verma A, Feinzimer D. Compressed residual-VGG16 CNN model for big data places image recognition. IEEE 8th annual computing and communication workshop and conference. 2018. p. 169–175.
   Google Scholar
• Saim M, Abdel-Razek M, Gamal M, et al. A comparative study of real-time semantic segmentation for autonomous driving. IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition workshops. 2018. p. 700–710.
   Google Scholar
• Carvalho T, De Rezende ERS, Alves MTP, et al. Exposing computer generated images by eye’s region classification via transfer learning of VGG19 CNN. 16th IEEE international conference on machine learning and application. 2017. p. 866–870.
   Google Scholar
• Shaha M, Pawar M. Transfer learning for image classification. 2nd International conference on electronics, communication and aerospace technology. 2018. p. 656–660.
   Google Scholar
• Wieslander H, Forslid G, Carolina W, et al. Deep convolutional neural networks for detecting cellular changes due to malignancy. IEEE international conference on computer vision workshops. 2017. p. 82–89.
   Google Scholar
• Junfei Y, Jingwen L, Bing S, et al. Barrage jamming detection and classification based on convolutional neural network for synthetic aperture radar IEEE international geoscience remote sensing symposium. 2018. p. 4583–4586.
   Google Scholar
• Huttner V, Steffens CR, Botelho SSC. First response fire combat: deep leaning based visible fire detection. Latin American robotics symposium and Brazilian symposium on robotics. 2017. p. 1–6.
   Google Scholar
• Gupta SK, Ashwin TS, Mohana R, et al. CVUCAMS : computer vision based unobtrusive classroom attendance management system. IEEE 18th international conference on advanced learning technologies. 2018. p. 101–102.
   Google Scholar
• Boonyuen K, Kaewprapha P, Srivihok P. Daily rainfall forecast model from satellite image using convolution neural network. International conference on information technology. 2018. p. 1–7.
   Google Scholar
• Zhu Z, Zhuo L, Qu P, et al. Extreme weather recognition using convolutional neural networks. IEEE international symposium on multimedia. 2016. p. 621–626.
   Google Scholar
• Raschka S, Mirjalili V. Python machine learning. 2nd ed Birmingham: Pact Publishing; 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Ioffe S, Szegedy C. Batch normalization: Accelerating deep network training by reducing internal covariate shift. 2015. arXiv preprint. Available from: arXiv:1502.03167.
   Google Scholar
• Eiben AE, Schoenauer M. Evolutionary computing. Inf Process Lett. 2002;82(2002):1–6.
   Google Scholar
• Zhang Y, Agarwal P, Bhatnagar V, et al. Swarm intelligence and its applications. Scientific World J. 2013;2013; Article ID 528069. 3 pages. doi: 10.1155/2013/528069
   Google Scholar
• Eberhart R, Shi Y, Kennedy J. Swarm intelligence. 1st ed. Waltham (MA): Morgan Kaufmann; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Guyon I, Gunn S, Nikravesh M, et al. Feature extraction: foundations and applications (Studies in fuzziness and soft computing). Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 2006.
   Google Scholar
• Huang CL, Wang CJ. A GA-based feature selection and parameters optimization for support vector machines. Expert Syst Appl. 2006;31(2):231–240.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marinakis Y, Dounias G, Jantzen J. Pap smear diagnosis using a hybrid intelligent scheme focusing on genetic algorithm-based feature selection and nearest neighbor classification. Comput Biol Med. 2009;39(1):69–78.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vieira SM, Sousa JMC, Runkler TA. Two cooperative ant colonies for feature selection using fuzzy models. Expert Syst Appl. 2010;37(2010):2714–2723.
   Google Scholar
• Huang CL. ACO-based hybrid classification system with feature subset selection and model parameters optimization. Neurocomputing. 2009;73(1–3):438–448.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vieira SM, Sousa JMC, Kaymak U. Fuzzy criteria for feature selection. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 2012;189(1):1–18. doi: 10.1016/j.fss.2011.09.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vieiara SM, Mendonca LF, Farinha GJ, et al. Modified binary PSO for feature selection using SVM applied to mortality prediction of septic patients. Appl Soft Comput. 2013;13(8):3494–3504.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang XS. Particle swarm optimization. Nature-inspired optimization algorithms. 2014:99–110. DOI:10.1016/b978-0-12-416743-8.00007-5
   Google Scholar
• Rodrigues D, Pereira LAM, Almeida TNS, et al. BCS: a binary cuckoo search algorithm for feature selection. IEEE Int Symp Circuits Syst. 2013:465–468. doi: 10.1109/iscas.2013.6571881
   Google Scholar
• Prasath R, Kumanan T. Distance-oriented cuckoo search enabled optimal histogram for underwater image enhancement: a novel quality metric analysis. Imaging Sci J. 2019;67(2):76–89. doi: 10.1080/13682199.2018.1552356
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nakamura RYM, Pereira LAM, Costa KA, et al. BBA: a binary bat algorithm for feature selection. In: 25th SIBGRAPI Conference on Graphics, Patterns and Images; 2012. p. 291–297. DOI:10.1109/sibgrapi.2012.47
   Google Scholar
• Xu H, Yu S, Chen J, et al. An improved firefly algorithm for feature selection in classification. Wirel Pers Commun. 2018;102(4):2823–2834. doi: 10.1007/s11277-018-5309-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anbu M, Anandha Mala GS. Feature selection using firefly algorithm in software defect prediction. Cluster Comput. 2017:1–10. doi: 10.1007/s10586-017-1235-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang L, Mistry K, Lim CP, et al. Feature selection using firefly optimization for classification and regression models. Decis Support Syst. 2018;106:64–85. doi: 10.1016/j.dss.2017.12.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taha AM, Mustapha A, Chen SD. Naive bayes-guided bat algorithm for feature selection. Scientific World J. 2013;2013:1–10. doi: 10.1155/2013/325973
   Google Scholar
• Tawhid MA, Dsouza KB. Hybrid binary bat enhanced particle swarm optimization algorithm for solving feature selection problems. Appl Comput Inform. 2018. doi: 10.1016/j.aci.2018.04.001
   Google Scholar
• Available from: https://scikit-learn.org/stable/modules/ensemble.html#voting-classifier. Accessed 1 February 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Breiman L. Bagging predictors. Mach Learn. 1996;24(2):123–140.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Breiman L. Random forests. Mach Learn. 2001;45(1):5–32.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhu J, Zou H, Rosset S, et al. Multi-class adaboost. Stat Interface. 2009;2(3):349–360.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friedman JH. Greedy function approximation: a gradient boosting machine. Ann Stat. 2001;29(5):1189–1232.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schapire RE, Freund Y. Boosting: foundations and algorithms. Cambridge (MA): The MIT Press; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• The MathWorks Inc. 2019. Available from: https://in.mathworks.com/help/deeplearning/getting-started-with-deep-learning-toolbox.html. Accessed 30 January 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Python Software Foundation. 2019. Available from: https://www.python.org/.
   Google Scholar
• Pedregosa F, Varoquaux G, Gramfort A, et al. Scikit-learn: machine learning in python. J Mach Learn Res. 2011;12(Oct):2825–2830.
   Google Scholar
• MDE-Lab. 2011. Available from: http://mde-lab.aegean.gr/downloads. Accessed 11 January 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Jantzen J, Norup J, Dounias G, et al. Pap-smear benchmark data for pattern classification. Proceedings NiSIS 2005: nature inspired smart information systems (NiSIS), EU co-ordination action. Albufeira, Portugal: NiSIS; 2005. p. 1-9.
   Google Scholar
• Byriel J. (1999). Neuro-fuzzy classification of cells in cervical smears. M. Sc Thesis, Denmark.
   Google Scholar
• Jantzen J, Dounias G. Analysis of pap-smear image data. Puerto de la Cruz: NISIS; 2006.
   Google Scholar
• Standford vision lab. 2016. Available from: http://www.image-net.org/index Accessed on 10 February 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Bishop CM. Pattern recognition and machine learning. New York (NY): Springer; 2006.
   Google Scholar
• Bora K, Chowdhury M, Mahanta LB, et al. Automated classification of pap smear images to detect cervical dysplasia. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2017;138:31–47.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kokkinos Y, Margaritis KG. Breaking ties of plurality voting in ensembles of distributed neural network classifiers using soft max accumulations. In: Iliadis L, Maglogiannis I, Papadopoulos H, editors. Artificial intelligence applications and innovations Vol. 436. Berlin: Springer; 2014. p. 20–28.
   Google Scholar
• Bergstra J, Bengio Y. Random search for hyper-parameter optimization. J Mach Learn. 2012;12(2012):281–305.
   Google Scholar
• Kohavi R. A study of cross-validation and bootstrap for accuracy estimation and model selection. Int Jt Conf Artificial Intell. 1995;14(2):1137–1145.
   Google Scholar