Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

RETRACTED ARTICLE: Mass classification method in mammograms using correlated association rule mining

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Neural Computing and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This article was retracted on 26 October 2015

Abstract

In this paper, we present an efficient computer-aided mass classification method in digitized mammograms using Association rule mining, which performs benign–malignant classification on region of interest that contains mass. One of the major mammographic characteristics for mass classification is texture. Association rule mining (ARM) exploits this important factor to classify the mass into benign or malignant. The statistical textural features used in characterizing the masses are mean, standard deviation, entropy, skewness, kurtosis and uniformity. The main aim of the method is to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of the classification process in an objective manner to reduce the numbers of false-positive of malignancies. Correlated association rule mining was proposed for classifying the marked regions into benign and malignant and 98.6% sensitivity and 97.4% specificity is achieved that is very much promising compare to the radiologist’s sensitivity 75%.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Oliver A, Freixenet J, Marti R, Pont J, Perez E, Denton ERE, Zwiggelaar R (2008) A novel breast tissue density classification methodology. IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed 12(1):55–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bird RE (1990) Professional quality assurance for mammography screening programs. J Radiol 175:587–605

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Cheng HD, Shi XJ, Min R, Hu LM, Cai XP, Du HN (2006) Approaches for automated detection and classification of masses in mammograms. Pattern Recogn 39:646–668

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Yang SC, Wany CM et al (2005) A computer-aided system for mass detection and classification indigitized mammograms. J Biomed Eng Appl Basis Commun 17:215–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Duda RO, Hart PE, Stork DG (2001) Pattern classification, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Chan HP, Wei D, Helvie MA, Sahiner B et al (1995) Computer-aided classification of mammographic masses and normal tissue: linear discriminant analysis in texture feature space. J Phys Med Biol 40:857–876

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Sahiner B, Petrick N, Chan HP (2001) Computer-aided characterization of mammographic masses: accuracy of mass segmentation and its effects on characterization. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 20(12):1275–1284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Viton JL, Rasigni M, Rasigni G, Liebaria A (1996) Method for characterizing masses in digital mammograms. Opt Eng 35(12):3453–3459

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Lisboa PJG (2000) A review of evidence of health benefits from artificial neural networks in medical intervention. Neural Netw 15:11–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Alginahi Y (2004) Computer analysis of composite documents with non-uniform background. PhD thesis, Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Windsor, Windsor

  11. Alginahi Y (2008) Thresholding and character recognition in security documents with watermarked background. In: Proceedings of the international conference on digital image computing: techniques and applications, pp 220–225

  12. Zheng B, Chang YH, Wang XH, Good WF (1999) Comparison of artificial neural network and Bayesian belief network in a computer assisted diagnosis scheme for mammography. In: IEEE international conference on neural networks, pp 4181–4185

  13. Sahiner B, Chan HP, Petrick N, Helvie MA, Goodsitt MM (1998) Design of a high-sensitivity classifier based on a genetic algorithm: application to computer-aided diagnosis. Phys Med Biol 43(10):2853–2871

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Agrawal R, Imielinski T, Swami AN (1993) Mining association rules between sets of items in large databases. In: Proceedings of the 1993 ACM SIGMOD ICMD. ACM, Washington, DC, pp 207–216

  15. Ribeiro MX, Traina AJM, Balan AGR, Traina C, Jr, Marques PMA (2007) SuGAR: a framework to support mammogram diagnosis. In: IEEE CBMS 2007. Maribor, Slovenia, pp 47–52

  16. Yun J, Zhanhuai L, Yong W, Longbo Z (2005) Joining associative classifier for medical images. HIS, pp 367–372

  17. Tseng SV, Wang M-H, Su J-H (2005) A new method for image classification by using multilevel association rules. Presented at ICDE 05; Tokyo, pp 1180–1187

  18. Zimmermann A, De Raedt L (2004) CorClass: Correlated association rule mining for classification. Proc Discov Sci 3245:60–72

    Google Scholar 

  19. Alginahi Y, Sid-Ahmed MA, Ahmadi M (2004) Local thresholding of composite documents using multi-layer perception neural network. In: 47th IEEE international midwest symposium on circuits and systems, pp 209–212

  20. Sid-Ahmed MA (1995) Image processing theory, algorithms and architectures, 1st edn. McGraw-Hill, New York. Int J Artif Intell Appl 1(3) July 2010

  21. marathon.csee.usf.edu/Mammography/Database.html

  22. Wang X, Smith MR, Rangayyan RM (2004) Mammographic information analysis through association-rule mining. Canadian conference on electrical and computer engineering 2004. doi:10.1109/CCECE.2004.1349689

  23. Roselin R, Thangavel K (2010) Classification ensemble for mammograms using ant-miner. International conference on computing communication and networking technologies (ICCCNT), pp 1–6. doi:10.1109/ICCCNT.2010.5592607

  24. Dua S, Singh H, Thompson HW (2009) Associative classification of mammograms using weighted rules. Expert Syst Appl 36(5):9250–9259. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2008.12.050

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Rajendran P, Madheswaran M (2010) Novel fuzzy association rule image mining algorithm for medical Decision support system. Int J Comput Appl 1(20):87–94. doi:10.5120/415-613

    Google Scholar 

  26. Kobyliński L, Walczak K Image classification with customized associative classifiers. In: Proceedings of the international multiconference on computer science and information technology, pp 85–91

  27. Lairenjam B, Wasan SK (2009) Neural network with classification based on multiple association rule for classifying mammographic data. In: Proceedings of IDEAL’2009, pp 465–476

  28. Thangavel K, Kaja Mohideen A (2009) Classification of microcalcifications using multi-dimensional genetic association rule miner. Int J Recent Trends Eng 2(2):233–235

    Google Scholar 

  29. Holmes G, Donkin A, Witten IH (1994) WEKA: a machine learning workbench. In: Proceedings second Australia and New Zealand conference on intelligent information systems, Brisbane, pp 357–361

  30. Veldkamp WJH, Karssemeijer N, Otten JDM, Hendriks JHCL (2000) Automated classification of clustered microcalcifications into malignant and benign types. Med Phys 27(11):2600–2608

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Wei L, Yang Y, Nishikawa RM, Jiang Y (2005) A study on several machine-learning methods for classification of malignant and benign clustered microcalcifications. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 24(2):371–380

    Google Scholar 

  32. Abu-Amara F, Abdel-Qader I (2009) Hybrid mammogram classification using rough set and fuzzy classifier. Int J Biomed Imaging 2009. doi:10.1155/2009/680508

  33. Chan H-P, Sahiner B, Patrick N, Helvie MA, Lam KL, Adler DD, Goodsitt MM (1997) Computerized classification of malignant and benign microcalcifications on mammograms: texture analysis using an artificial neural network. Phys Med Biol 42(3):549–567

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Vibha L, Harshavardhan GM, Pranaw K, Deepa Shenoy P, Venugopal KR, Patnaik LM Classification of mammograms using decision trees, database engineering and applications symposium, IDEAS’06″. doi:10.1109/IDEAS.2006.14

  35. Thangavel K, Roselin R (2009) Mammogram mining with genetic optimization of ant-miner parameters. Int J Recent Trends Eng 2(3):67–69

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. SOA University, Bhubaneswar, Orissa, India

    Aswini Kumar Mohanty

  2. Krupajal Engineering College, Bhubaneswar, Orissa, India

    Manas Senapati

  3. BPUT, Rourkela, Orissa, India

    Swapnasikta Beberta

  4. Department of Computer Science, Mody University, Lakshmangarh, 332311, Rajasthan, India

    Saroj Kumar Lenka

Authors
  1. Aswini Kumar Mohanty
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Manas Senapati
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Swapnasikta Beberta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Saroj Kumar Lenka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Aswini Kumar Mohanty.

Additional information

An erratum to this article is available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00521-015-2084-8.

The Editor-in-Chief has decided to retract this article. Upon investigation carried out according to the Committee on Publication Ethics guidelines, it has been found that the authors have duplicated substantial parts from the following article: Classification Using Association Rules Rajanish Dass W.P. No. 2008-01-05 January 2008 INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT AHMEDABAD INDIA

About this article

Cite this article

Mohanty, A.K., Senapati, M., Beberta, S. et al. RETRACTED ARTICLE: Mass classification method in mammograms using correlated association rule mining. Neural Comput & Applic 23, 273–281 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-012-0857-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-012-0857-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation