↓ Skip to main content

Pathological brain detection in MRI scanning by wavelet packet Tsallis entropy and fuzzy support vector machine

Overview of attention for article published in SpringerPlus, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (55th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
68 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Pathological brain detection in MRI scanning by wavelet packet Tsallis entropy and fuzzy support vector machine
Published in
SpringerPlus, November 2015
DOI 10.1186/s40064-015-1523-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yu-Dong Zhang, Shui-Hua Wang, Xiao-Jun Yang, Zheng-Chao Dong, Ge Liu, Preetha Phillips, Ti-Fei Yuan

Abstract

An computer-aided diagnosis system of pathological brain detection (PBD) is important for help physicians interpret and analyze medical images. We proposed a novel automatic PBD to distinguish pathological brains from healthy brains in magnetic resonance imaging scanning in this paper. The proposed method simplified the PBD problem to a binary classification task. We extracted the wavelet packet Tsallis entropy (WPTE) from each brain image. The WPTE is the Tsallis entropy of the coefficients of the discrete wavelet packet transform. The, the features were submitted to the fuzzy support vector machine (FSVM). We tested the proposed diagnosis method on 3 benchmark datasets with different sizes. A ten runs of K-fold stratified cross validation was carried out. The results demonstrated that the proposed WPTE + FSVM method excelled 17 state-of-the-art methods w.r.t. classification accuracy. The WPTE is superior to discrete wavelet transform. The Tsallis entropy performs better than Shannon entropy. The FSVM excels standard SVM. In closing, the proposed method "WPTE + FSVM" is effective in PBD.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 13%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Lecturer 2 6%
Researcher 2 6%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 12 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 6 19%
Engineering 4 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Mathematics 1 3%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 14 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 24 June 2016.
All research outputs
#7,485,442
of 22,879,161 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#495
of 1,850 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#119,765
of 386,830 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#36
of 188 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,879,161 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,850 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its peers.
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 386,830 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 188 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.