mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Investigating certain choices of CNN configurations for brain lesion segmentation

arXiv 2212.01235 ↗First posted 2 Dec 2022eess.IV cs.CV cs.LGcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Brain tumor imaging has been part of the clinical routine for many years to perform non-invasive detection and grading of tumors. Tumor segmentation is a crucial step for managing primary brain tumors because it allows a volumetric analysis to have a longitudinal follow-up of tumor growth or shrinkage to monitor disease progression and therapy response. In addition, it facilitates further quantitative analysis such as radiomics. Deep learning models, in particular CNNs, have been a methodology of choice in many applications of medical image analysis including brain tumor segmentation. In this study, we investigated the main design aspects of CNN models for the specific task of MRI-based brain tumor segmentation. Two commonly used CNN architectures (i.e. DeepMedic and U-Net) were used to evaluate the impact of the essential parameters such as learning rate, batch size, loss function, and optimizer. The performance of CNN models using different configurations was assessed with the BraTS 2018 dataset to determine the most performant model. Then, the generalization ability of the model was assessed using our in-house dataset. For all experiments, U-Net achieved a higher DSC compared to the DeepMedic. However, the difference was only statistically significant for whole tumor segmentation using FLAIR sequence data and tumor core segmentation using T1w sequence data. Adam and SGD both with the initial learning rate set to 0.001 provided the highest segmentation DSC when training the CNN model using U-Net and DeepMedic architectures, respectively. No significant difference was observed when using different normalization approaches. In terms of loss functions, a weighted combination of soft Dice and cross-entropy loss with the weighting term set to 0.5 resulted in an improved segmentation performance and training stability for both DeepMedic and U-Net models.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 12 of its 28 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Dec 2022.

Builds on

12 of 28 references.

References · 12

  1. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 52,096
  2. 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 37,240
  3. 2014Very Deep Convolutional Networks for Large-Scale Image Recognitioncited by 15,364
  4. 2016Densely Connected Convolutional Networkscited by 6,720
  5. 2015Rethinking the Inception Architecture for Computer Visioncited by 5,475
  6. 2015Delving Deep into Rectifiers: Surpassing Human-Level Performance on ImageNet Classificationcited by 3,611
  7. 20163D U-Net: Learning Dense Volumetric Segmentation from Sparse Annotationcited by 1,476
  8. 2017Focal Loss for Dense Object Detectioncited by 752
  9. 2013Do Deep Nets Really Need to be Deep?cited by 474
  10. 2021Domain Adaptation for Medical Image Analysis: A Surveycited by 352
  11. 2016Efficient Multi-Scale 3D CNN with Fully Connected CRF for Accurate Brain Lesion Segmentationcited by 263
  12. 2019Artificial Intelligence in Glioma Imaging: Challenges and Advancescited by 10

Built on by

Not cited yet.