Neural Architecture Search for biomedical image classification: A comparative study across data modalities

IF 6.1 2区 医学 Q1 COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE Artificial Intelligence in Medicine Pub Date : 2025-02-01 DOI:10.1016/j.artmed.2024.103064
Zeki Kuş , Musa Aydin , Berna Kiraz , Alper Kiraz
{"title":"Neural Architecture Search for biomedical image classification: A comparative study across data modalities","authors":"Zeki Kuş ,&nbsp;Musa Aydin ,&nbsp;Berna Kiraz ,&nbsp;Alper Kiraz","doi":"10.1016/j.artmed.2024.103064","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Deep neural networks have significantly advanced medical image classification across various modalities and tasks. However, manually designing these networks is often time-consuming and suboptimal. Neural Architecture Search (NAS) automates this process, potentially finding more efficient and effective models. This study provides a comprehensive comparative analysis of our two NAS methods, PBC-NAS and BioNAS, across multiple biomedical image classification tasks using the MedMNIST dataset. Our experiments evaluate these methods based on classification performance (Accuracy (ACC) and Area Under the Curve (AUC)) and computational complexity (Floating Point Operation Counts). Results demonstrate that BioNAS models slightly outperform PBC-NAS models in accuracy, with BioNAS-2 achieving the highest average accuracy of 0.848. However, PBC-NAS models exhibit superior computational efficiency, with PBC-NAS-2 achieving the lowest average FLOPs of 0.82 GB. Both methods outperform state-of-the-art architectures like ResNet-18 and ResNet-50 and AutoML frameworks such as auto-sklearn, AutoKeras, and Google AutoML. Additionally, PBC-NAS and BioNAS outperform other NAS studies in average ACC results (except MSTF-NAS), and show highly competitive results in average AUC. We conduct extensive ablation studies to investigate the impact of architectural parameters, the effectiveness of fine-tuning, search space efficiency, and the discriminative performance of generated architectures. These studies reveal that larger filter sizes and specific numbers of stacks or modules enhance performance. Fine-tuning existing architectures can achieve nearly optimal results without separating NAS for each dataset. Furthermore, we analyze search space efficiency, uncovering patterns in frequently selected operations and architectural choices. This study highlights the strengths and efficiencies of PBC-NAS and BioNAS, providing valuable insights and guidance for future research and practical applications in biomedical image classification.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":55458,"journal":{"name":"Artificial Intelligence in Medicine","volume":"160 ","pages":"Article 103064"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Artificial Intelligence in Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0933365724003063","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Deep neural networks have significantly advanced medical image classification across various modalities and tasks. However, manually designing these networks is often time-consuming and suboptimal. Neural Architecture Search (NAS) automates this process, potentially finding more efficient and effective models. This study provides a comprehensive comparative analysis of our two NAS methods, PBC-NAS and BioNAS, across multiple biomedical image classification tasks using the MedMNIST dataset. Our experiments evaluate these methods based on classification performance (Accuracy (ACC) and Area Under the Curve (AUC)) and computational complexity (Floating Point Operation Counts). Results demonstrate that BioNAS models slightly outperform PBC-NAS models in accuracy, with BioNAS-2 achieving the highest average accuracy of 0.848. However, PBC-NAS models exhibit superior computational efficiency, with PBC-NAS-2 achieving the lowest average FLOPs of 0.82 GB. Both methods outperform state-of-the-art architectures like ResNet-18 and ResNet-50 and AutoML frameworks such as auto-sklearn, AutoKeras, and Google AutoML. Additionally, PBC-NAS and BioNAS outperform other NAS studies in average ACC results (except MSTF-NAS), and show highly competitive results in average AUC. We conduct extensive ablation studies to investigate the impact of architectural parameters, the effectiveness of fine-tuning, search space efficiency, and the discriminative performance of generated architectures. These studies reveal that larger filter sizes and specific numbers of stacks or modules enhance performance. Fine-tuning existing architectures can achieve nearly optimal results without separating NAS for each dataset. Furthermore, we analyze search space efficiency, uncovering patterns in frequently selected operations and architectural choices. This study highlights the strengths and efficiencies of PBC-NAS and BioNAS, providing valuable insights and guidance for future research and practical applications in biomedical image classification.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
生物医学图像分类的神经结构搜索:跨数据模式的比较研究。
深度神经网络在各种模式和任务中具有显著的先进医学图像分类。然而,手动设计这些网络通常是耗时且不理想的。神经架构搜索(NAS)自动化了这一过程,可能会发现更高效和有效的模型。本研究对我们的两种NAS方法,PBC-NAS和BioNAS,在使用MedMNIST数据集的多个生物医学图像分类任务中进行了全面的比较分析。我们的实验基于分类性能(准确率(ACC)和曲线下面积(AUC))和计算复杂度(浮点运算计数)来评估这些方法。结果表明,BioNAS模型在准确率上略优于PBC-NAS模型,其中BioNAS-2的平均准确率最高,为0.848。然而,PBC-NAS模型表现出更高的计算效率,PBC-NAS-2的平均FLOPs最低,为0.82 GB。这两种方法都优于ResNet-18和ResNet-50等最先进的架构和AutoML框架,如auto-sklearn、AutoKeras和谷歌AutoML。此外,PBC-NAS和BioNAS在平均ACC结果上优于其他NAS研究(MSTF-NAS除外),在平均AUC上具有很强的竞争力。我们进行了广泛的消融研究,以调查架构参数的影响、微调的有效性、搜索空间效率和生成架构的判别性能。这些研究表明,较大的滤波器尺寸和特定数量的堆栈或模块可以提高性能。对现有架构进行微调可以在不为每个数据集分离NAS的情况下获得近乎最佳的结果。此外,我们分析了搜索空间效率,揭示了经常选择的操作和架构选择中的模式。本研究突出了PBC-NAS和BioNAS的优势和效率,为未来生物医学图像分类的研究和实际应用提供了有价值的见解和指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Artificial Intelligence in Medicine
Artificial Intelligence in Medicine 工程技术-工程:生物医学
CiteScore
15.00
自引率
2.70%
发文量
143
审稿时长
6.3 months
期刊介绍: Artificial Intelligence in Medicine publishes original articles from a wide variety of interdisciplinary perspectives concerning the theory and practice of artificial intelligence (AI) in medicine, medically-oriented human biology, and health care. Artificial intelligence in medicine may be characterized as the scientific discipline pertaining to research studies, projects, and applications that aim at supporting decision-based medical tasks through knowledge- and/or data-intensive computer-based solutions that ultimately support and improve the performance of a human care provider.
期刊最新文献
Hyperbolic multivariate feature learning in higher-order heterogeneous networks for drug–disease prediction Editorial Board BDFormer: Boundary-aware dual-decoder transformer for skin lesion segmentation Finger-aware Artificial Neural Network for predicting arthritis in Patients with hand pain Artificial intelligence-driven approaches in antibiotic stewardship programs and optimizing prescription practices: A systematic review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1