AI-Powered Advances in Skin Cancer Detection
New tech is changing the way we detect skin cancer early.
Ramin Mousa, Saeed Chamani, Mohammad Morsali, Mohammad Kazzazi, Parsa Hatami, Soroush Sarabi
― 6 min read
Table of Contents
- The Importance of Early Diagnosis
- The Role of Machine Learning
- Building a Better Model
- How It Works
- The Power of Wavelet Transforms
- Pre-trained Networks and Their Uses
- Inception
- Xception
- DenseNet
- MobileNet
- Optimization Algorithms for Better Results
- Fox Optimizer
- Improved Grey Wolf Optimizer (IGWO)
- Modified Gorilla Troops Optimizer (MGTO)
- Experimental Results
- Conclusion
- Original Source
- Reference Links
Skin cancer is a serious health issue. It can be very dangerous if not caught early. The good news is that early detection can make a big difference in how well someone can be treated. In recent times, technology has started to help in finding skin cancer faster and more accurately. One such tech is Deep Learning, which is a type of artificial intelligence used to analyze images and identify potential issues.
The Importance of Early Diagnosis
When it comes to skin cancer, catching it early is key. If doctors can spot it just as it's starting, patients often have a much better chance of successful treatment. In fact, in 2022, over 331,000 people in the U.S. were diagnosed with skin cancer, and sadly, more than 58,000 of them did not survive. These numbers show how crucial early diagnosis is.
Many skin cancer signs can look like harmless skin changes, making it easier for people to dismiss them. Often, only a dermatologist, or skin doctor, can tell the difference. Unfortunately, this leads many people to wait until the cancer is more advanced before seeking help, which can delay treatment and make it less effective.
The Role of Machine Learning
Machine learning and deep learning can help in detecting skin cancer. They offer a way to automatically analyze images and identify possible signs of disease. A critical point in using these technologies is their accuracy. If an algorithm can improve the accuracy of skin cancer detection, it can save lives.
Convolutional Neural Networks, or CNNs, are a specific type of deep learning model known for doing well in image classification tasks. By improving the accuracy of these models, we can potentially catch skin cancer early.
Building a Better Model
To boost the accuracy of skin cancer detection models, new techniques are being introduced. This includes using a combination of optimization strategies, Pre-trained Networks, and image transformations like Wavelet Transforms.
How It Works
First, images of skin are processed using various pre-trained models like DenseNet, Inception, and MobileNet. These models are trained to extract features from input images. Once the features are extracted, they are analyzed using a wavelet transform, which helps capture important details in the images.
After processing, a technique called self-attention is used. This allows the model to focus on the most important parts of the image. Next, advanced swarm-based optimization strategies are applied to fine-tune the model. These strategies help adjust the model's settings to improve performance.
The result? Greatly improved accuracy in diagnosing skin cancer.
The Power of Wavelet Transforms
Traditional methods for analyzing images might struggle when it comes to sharp edges or sudden changes in the images. This is where wavelets come in. They are nifty little tools that help break down images into different parts, making it easier to find important features like edges and textures.
Wavelet transforms can be thought of as a way to separate the details from the broader picture. They help focus on smaller, detailed segments of an image which are essential for detecting changes related to skin cancer.
Pre-trained Networks and Their Uses
Several pre-trained networks play a significant role in enhancing skin cancer detection. Here are some of the key networks:
Inception
This model, also known as GoogleNet, is designed with a flexible structure that allows it to use different types of convolution layers and pooling layers. This flexibility helps it perform well across various image tasks.
Xception
An extension of the Inception model, Xception focuses on depthwise separable convolutions. This unique approach improves efficiency and helps achieve high accuracy in image processing.
DenseNet
This nifty architecture connects each layer to all the previous layers, which not only helps in effective feature propagation but also prevents the vanishing gradient problem during training. Less risk of error leads to better accuracy, especially with smaller datasets.
MobileNet
Designed for devices with limited resources, MobileNet provides high performance without a hefty computational cost. It's incredibly versatile and can be utilized for tasks such as object detection and fine-grained classification.
Optimization Algorithms for Better Results
Once the models are set up, optimization algorithms come into play. These algorithms help refine the model, adjusting parameters to maximize performance. Here are three optimization algorithms being used:
Fox Optimizer
This algorithm is inspired by the hunting strategies of foxes. It creatively mimics how foxes listen to sounds and adjust their movements to catch their prey. By simulating these actions, it helps find the best settings for the model.
Improved Grey Wolf Optimizer (IGWO)
Inspired by the social behavior of grey wolves, IGWO enhances the traditional Grey Wolf Optimizer. It makes adjustments to address challenges faced during complex optimizations. This leads to better exploration of potential solutions, helping to refine the model more effectively.
Modified Gorilla Troops Optimizer (MGTO)
MGTO builds on older gorilla troop optimization strategies to improve exploration and avoid common pitfalls like premature convergence. It increases diversity in the model’s search space, which leads to better results.
Experimental Results
The proposed methods have been tested using two datasets: ISIC-2016 and ISIC-2017. These datasets include numerous images of skin lesions meant for training and evaluation. The finding was that using wavelet transformations and advanced optimizers greatly enhanced the accuracy of skin cancer detection.
The accuracy rates achieved through the new methods were impressive. For instance, combining an advanced model with wavelet transforms and the Fox Optimizer achieved accuracy rates of over 98%. This was a significant improvement over older methods.
Conclusion
In summary, improving skin cancer diagnosis is a pressing need in medicine. By combining deep learning techniques, wavelet transforms, and advanced optimization algorithms, it’s possible to develop highly accurate models to help identify skin cancer earlier.
This integration of technology in healthcare not only improves patient outcomes but also helps save lives. Going forward, as technology continues to advance, the hope is that skin cancer detection will become even more precise and accessible to those in need. So, here's to technology—making our lives healthier, one algorithm at a time!
And remember, if you notice any skin changes, don’t wait! See a dermatologist. After all, that little mole that looks like a harmless freckle could be hiding a secret or two.
Original Source
Title: Enhancing Skin Cancer Diagnosis (SCD) Using Late Discrete Wavelet Transform (DWT) and New Swarm-Based Optimizers
Abstract: Skin cancer (SC) stands out as one of the most life-threatening forms of cancer, with its danger amplified if not diagnosed and treated promptly. Early intervention is critical, as it allows for more effective treatment approaches. In recent years, Deep Learning (DL) has emerged as a powerful tool in the early detection and skin cancer diagnosis (SCD). Although the DL seems promising for the diagnosis of skin cancer, still ample scope exists for improving model efficiency and accuracy. This paper proposes a novel approach to skin cancer detection, utilizing optimization techniques in conjunction with pre-trained networks and wavelet transformations. First, normalized images will undergo pre-trained networks such as Densenet-121, Inception, Xception, and MobileNet to extract hierarchical features from input images. After feature extraction, the feature maps are passed through a Discrete Wavelet Transform (DWT) layer to capture low and high-frequency components. Then the self-attention module is integrated to learn global dependencies between features and focus on the most relevant parts of the feature maps. The number of neurons and optimization of the weight vectors are performed using three new swarm-based optimization techniques, such as Modified Gorilla Troops Optimizer (MGTO), Improved Gray Wolf Optimization (IGWO), and Fox optimization algorithm. Evaluation results demonstrate that optimizing weight vectors using optimization algorithms can enhance diagnostic accuracy and make it a highly effective approach for SCD. The proposed method demonstrates substantial improvements in accuracy, achieving top rates of 98.11% with the MobileNet + Wavelet + FOX and DenseNet + Wavelet + Fox combination on the ISIC-2016 dataset and 97.95% with the Inception + Wavelet + MGTO combination on the ISIC-2017 dataset, which improves accuracy by at least 1% compared to other methods.
Authors: Ramin Mousa, Saeed Chamani, Mohammad Morsali, Mohammad Kazzazi, Parsa Hatami, Soroush Sarabi
Last Update: 2024-11-30 00:00:00
Language: English
Source URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.00472
Source PDF: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2412.00472
Licence: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Changes: This summary was created with assistance from AI and may have inaccuracies. For accurate information, please refer to the original source documents linked here.
Thank you to arxiv for use of its open access interoperability.
Reference Links
- https://challenge.isic-archive.com/data/
- https://github.com/Parsa-Hatami/Enhancing-Skin-Cancer-Diagnosis-Using-Late-Discrete-Wavelet-Transform-and-New-Swarm-Based-Optimizers
- https://www.wcrf.org/cancer-trends/skin-cancer-statistics/
- https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21820
- https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/ubctheses/24/items/1.0435879
- https://doi.org/10.31893/multiscience.2023ss0405
- https://doi.org/10.47852/bonviewAIA3202853
- https://jcbi.org/index.php/Main/article/view/250
- https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3298826
- https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers15072146
- https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13050912
- https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13081460
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.11.055
- https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-84820-0
- https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-27777-8
- https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-28498-7
- https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-32911-2
- https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-38493-y
- https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-45039-w
- https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-45864-1
- https://doi.org/10.3390/s23073548
- https://doi.org/10.1111/srt.13524
- https://doi.org/10.4114/intartif.vol27iss74pp102-116
- https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers16061120
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-023-00722-7
- https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-52345-5
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sysarc.2023.102871
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2022.129034
- https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/1084/1/012015
- https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3179517
- https://doi.org/10.1145/3524086.3524094
- https://arxiv.org/abs/1805.08620
- https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR.2017.386
- https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR.2015.7298594
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s11263-015-0816-y
- https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR.2017.195
- https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR.2017.243
- https://arxiv.org/abs/1704.04861
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-022-03451-7
- https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-46865-8
- https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.13091/6236
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2020.113917
- https://doi.org/10.1177/13694332211004116
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2023.110462
- https://doi.org/10.1002/int.22341
- https://arxiv.org/abs/1605.01397
- https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.05006
- https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR.2016.90
- https://doi.org/10.1002/jemt.23908
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s11517-021-02473-0
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patrec.2019.03.018