Tumour Classification in Graph-Cut Segmented Mammograms Using GLCM Features-Fed SVM

  • C. A. Ancy
  • Lekha S. Nair
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 695)


Mammograms are customarily employed as one of the reliable computer-aided detection (CAD) techniques. We propose an efficient modified graph-cut (GC) segmented, grey-level co-occurrence matrix (GLCM)-based support vector machine (SVM) technique, for classification of tumour. In this work, SVM classification was carried out in single-view mammograms, subsequent to preprocessing, GC segmentation and GLCM feature extraction. Segmentation of pectoral muscles was done first, followed by segmentation of tumour, using kernel space mapped normalized GCs. We believe this process is the first of its kind used in mammograms. A suitably large number of features were extracted from GLCM, using Haralick method, which in turn increased the training efficiency. The proposed method was tested on 322 different mammograms from Mammographic Image Analysis Society (MIAS) and hence successfully verified to provide efficient results. High accuracy rates were achieved by combining best methods at each stage of diagnosis.


Gamma expansion Normalized graph cuts Mammograms Haralick method GLCM SVM 


  1. 1.
    Somasundaram, K., Kalavathi, P.: Medical image contrast enhancement based on gamma correction. Int. J. Knowl. Manag. e-Learn. 3(1), 15–18 (2011)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Saidin, N., et al.: Density based breast segmentation for mammograms using graph cut techniques. In: TENCON Region 10 Conference, pp. 663–667. IEEE (2009)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Abdellatif, H., et al.: K2. Automatic pectoral muscle boundary detection in mammograms using eigenvectors segmentation. In: Radio Science Conference (NRSC), 10 Apr 2012, pp. 633–640. IEEE (2012)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Angayarkanni, S.P., et al.: Dynamic graph cut based segmentation of mammogram. SpringerPlus 4(1), 591 (2015)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bellotti, R., et al.: A completely automated CAD system for mass detection in a large mammographic database. Med. Phys. 33(8), 3066–3075 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Georgsson, F.: Differential analysis of bilateral mammograms. Int. J. Pattern Recognit. Artif. Intell. 17 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Shi, J., et al.: Normalized cuts and image segmentation. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 22 (2000)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Salah, M.B., et al.: Multiregion image segmentation by parametric kernel graph cuts. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 20(2) (2011)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Boykov, Y., et al.: An experimental comparison of min-cut/max-flow algorithms for energy minimization in vision. IEEE Trans. PAMI 26(9) (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nair, J.J., et al.: A robust non local means maximum likelihood estimation method for Rician noise reduction in MR images. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Communication and Signal processing, ICCSP (2014)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rajan, J., Kannan, K., Kaimal, M.R.: Smoothening and sharpening effects of theta in complex diffusion for image processing. In: Seventh International Conference on Advances in Pattern Recognition (2009)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nair, J.J., Bhadran, B.: Denoising of SAR images using maximum likelihood estimation. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Communication and Signal processing, ICCSP (2014)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Priya, S.U., Nair, J.J.: Denoising of DT-MR images with an iterative PCA. Procedia Comput. Sci. 58, 603–613 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Amrita School of Engineering, Amrita Vishwa VidyapeethamAmrita UniversityAmritapuriIndia

Personalised recommendations