Skip to main content

Abstract

Supervised learning is ubiquitous in medical image analysis. In this paper we consider the problem of meta-learning – predicting which methods will perform well in an unseen classification problem, given previous experience with other classification problems. We investigate the first step of such an approach: how to quantify the similarity of different classification problems. We characterize datasets sampled from six classification problems by performance ranks of simple classifiers, and define the similarity by the inverse of Euclidean distance in this meta-feature space. We visualize the similarities in a 2D space, where meaningful clusters start to emerge, and show that the proposed representation can be used to classify datasets according to their origin with 89.3% accuracy. These findings, together with the observations of recent trends in machine learning, suggest that meta-learning could be a valuable tool for the medical imaging community.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    http://prtools.org/.

  2. 2.

    https://lvdmaaten.github.io/tsne/.

References

  1. Vilalta, R., Drissi, Y.: A perspective view and survey of meta-learning. Artif. Intell. Rev. 18, 77–95 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Duin, R.P.W., Pekalska, E., Tax, D.M.J.: The characterization of classification problems by classifier disagreements. Int. Conf. Pattern Recogn. 1, 141–143 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Cheplygina, V., Tax, D.M.J.: Characterizing multiple instance datasets. In: Feragen, A., Pelillo, M., Loog, M. (eds.) SIMBAD 2015. LNCS, vol. 9370, pp. 15–27. Springer, Cham (2015). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-24261-3_2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Muenzing, S.E.A., van Ginneken, B., Viergever, M.A., Pluim, J.P.W.: DIRBoost-an algorithm for boosting deformable image registration: application to lung CT intra-subject registration. Med. Image Anal. 18(3), 449–459 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Gurari, D., Jain, S.D., Betke, M., Grauman, K.: Pull the plug? predicting if computers or humans should segment images. In: Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 382–391 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cox, T.F., Cox, M.A.: Multidimensional Scaling. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2000)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. van der Maaten, L., Hinton, G.: Visualizing data using t-SNE. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 9, 2579–2605 (2008)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Landman, B.A., et al.: MICCAI 2012 Workshop on Multi-Atlas Labeling. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Moeskops, P., Viergever, M.A., Mendrik, A.M., de Vries, L.S., Benders, M.J., Išgum, I.: Automatic segmentation of MR brain images with a convolutional neural network. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 35(5), 1252–1261 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Veta, M., Van Diest, P.J., Willems, S.M., Wang, H., Madabhushi, A., Cruz-Roa, A., Gonzalez, F., Larsen, A.B., Vestergaard, J.S., Dahl, A.B., et al.: Assessment of algorithms for mitosis detection in breast cancer histopathology images. Med. Image Anal. 20(1), 237–248 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Veta, M., van Diest, P.J., Jiwa, M., Al-Janabi, S., Pluim, J.P.W.: Mitosis counting in breast cancer: object-level interobserver agreement and comparison to an automatic method. PLoS ONE 11(8), e0161286 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Staal, J., Abràmoff, M.D., Niemeijer, M., Viergever, M.A., van Ginneken, B.: Ridge-based vessel segmentation in color images of the retina. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 23(4), 501–509 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Zhang, J., Dashtbozorg, B., Bekkers, E., Pluim, J.P.W., Duits, R., ter Haar Romeny, B.M.: Robust retinal vessel segmentation via locally adaptive derivative frames in orientation scores. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 35(12), 2631–2644 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Dashtbozorg, B., Mendonça, A.M., Campilho, A.: An automatic graph-based approach for artery/vein classification in retinal images. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 23(3), 1073–1083 (2014)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  15. Decencière, E., et al.: TeleOphta: machine learning and image processing methods for teleophthalmology. IRBM 34(2), 196–203 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Vanschoren, J., Van Rijn, J.N., Bischl, B., Torgo, L.: OpenML: networked science in machine learning. ACM SIGKDD Explorations Newsletter 15(2), 49–60 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Veronika Cheplygina .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper

Cheplygina, V., Moeskops, P., Veta, M., Dashtbozorg, B., Pluim, J.P.W. (2017). Exploring the Similarity of Medical Imaging Classification Problems. In: Cardoso, M., et al. Intravascular Imaging and Computer Assisted Stenting, and Large-Scale Annotation of Biomedical Data and Expert Label Synthesis. LABELS STENT CVII 2017 2017 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10552. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67534-3_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67534-3_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-67533-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-67534-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics