↓ Skip to main content

AdaptAhead Optimization Algorithm for Learning Deep CNN Applied to MRI Segmentation

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Digital Imaging, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
78 Mendeley
Title
AdaptAhead Optimization Algorithm for Learning Deep CNN Applied to MRI Segmentation
Published in
Journal of Digital Imaging, July 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10278-018-0107-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Farnaz Hoseini, Asadollah Shahbahrami, Peyman Bayat

Abstract

Deep learning is one of the subsets of machine learning that is widely used in artificial intelligence (AI) field such as natural language processing and machine vision. The deep convolution neural network (DCNN) extracts high-level concepts from low-level features and it is appropriate for large volumes of data. In fact, in deep learning, the high-level concepts are defined by low-level features. Previously, in optimization algorithms, the accuracy achieved for network training was less and high-cost function. In this regard, in this study, AdaptAhead optimization algorithm was developed for learning DCNN with robust architecture in relation to the high volume data. The proposed optimization algorithm was validated in multi-modality MR images of BRATS 2015 and BRATS 2016 data sets. Comparison of the proposed optimization algorithm with other commonly used methods represents the improvement of the performance of the proposed optimization algorithm on the relatively large dataset. Using the Dice similarity metric, we report accuracy results on the BRATS 2015 and BRATS 2016 brain tumor segmentation challenge dataset. Results showed that our proposed algorithm is significantly more accurate than other methods as a result of its deep and hierarchical extraction.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 78 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 17%
Researcher 7 9%
Student > Bachelor 5 6%
Lecturer 5 6%
Student > Master 5 6%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 33 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 16 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 12%
Engineering 8 10%
Neuroscience 3 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 1%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 35 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 July 2018.
All research outputs
#20,527,576
of 23,096,849 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Digital Imaging
#947
of 1,067 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#288,123
of 329,730 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Digital Imaging
#20
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,096,849 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,067 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 329,730 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.