Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Examples of the BraTS 2020 dataset on brain tumors images.

Yellow: enhancing tumor (ET), Blue: non-enhancing tumor/necrotic tumor (NET/NCR), Green: peritumoral edema (ED) [4].

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Overall block diagram of the proposed strategy used for enhancing brain tumor segmentation accuracy.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Proposed minimax normalization.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Fig 4.

Proposed combined techniques for data augmentation.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

Overview of proposed neural network architecture.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Fig 6.

A visualization of how max pooling works and its role in spatial down sampling within the 3D convolutional neural network architecture, each colored moving window captures the maximum value inside the 2x2x2 cube and outputs it on the right-hand side.

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Fig 7.

Illustration of the application of the proposed related-pooling function.

More »

Fig 7 Expand

Fig 8.

Segmentation Results of Eight BraTS’2020 Validation Cases: Image Modalities, Ground Truth Labels, and Ensemble Model Predictions.

More »

Fig 8 Expand

Table 1.

Model assembly (snapshot ensemble) and validation performance on BraTS 2020.

Pipelines A and B are trained independently with different normalization settings; the ensemble averages probability maps from the selected epochs per pipeline.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Additional information to visualize the performance of each model over the last 50 epochs.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Fig 9.

Plot of the first validation loss with Dice Score Metrics of the 3D-UNET for 300 epochs with Pipeline A and B.

More »

Fig 9 Expand

Table 3.

Comparison of different approaches by selecting the best model epochs on the BraTS 2020 validation set.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Table 4.

Comparison of different approaches’ performances on the validation set (means; best in bold).

More »

Table 4 Expand

Fig 10.

Performance comparison of proposed method with state-of-the-art techniques on BraTs 2020 dataset in terms of dice coefficient and Hausdorff Distance.

More »

Fig 10 Expand

Table 5.

Model performance on an internal test set extracted from the BraTS 2020 training dataset (means; best in bold).

More »

Table 5 Expand

Fig 11.

Visual segmentation results of proposed ensemble model method.

From left to right, show the axial slice of MRI images in two modalities, ground-truth and predicted results.

More »

Fig 11 Expand