Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Lightweight Weighted Average Ensemble Model for Pneumonia Detection in Chest X-Ray Images

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that a weighted average of MobileNetV2 and NASNetMobile detects pneumonia in pediatric chest X-rays with 98.63% accuracy, beating both base models and larger architectures on the Kermany test set.

desk verdict The headline 98.63% accuracy is a test-set selection artifact because the ensemble weights were grid-searched on the test set, so the claimed gains over the base models are not credible. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.16249 v2 pith:3K2NQAAY submitted 2025-01-27 eess.IV cs.AIcs.CV

Suresh Babu Nettur , Shanthi Karpurapu , Unnati Nettur , Likhit Sagar Gajja , Sravanthy Myneni , Akhil Dusi , Lalithya Posham This is my paper · ORCID
classification eess.IVcs.AIcs.CV
keywords pneumoniadetectionchestX-rayclassificationweightedaverageensembleMobileNetV2NASNettransferlearningKermanydatasetlightweightCNN
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper tries to establish that a weighted average of two lightweight pretrained convolutional networks, MobileNetV2 and NASNetMobile, classifies pediatric chest X-rays as pneumonia or normal with 98.63% accuracy on the Kermany dataset's 586-image test split. The authors fine-tune three lightweight models, set aside EfficientNetB0 after it trails at 72.18%, and combine the top two by grid-searching their weights at 0.005 increments to find the best blend. They report that the ensemble beats each base model and also heavier architectures such as ResNet50, InceptionV3, and DenseNet201, while keeping the total parameter count near 8.8 million. The contribution is an empirical recipe rather than a new theory: pick two efficient backbones with partly different inductive biases, fine-tune only the newly added classification layers, and average their predictions with optimized weights.

What carries the argument

The carrying mechanism is the weighted-average ensemble formula $\hat{y}_{\text{ensemble}} = \sum_i \omega_i \hat{y}_i$ with $\sum_i \omega_i = 1$, where $\hat{y}_i$ is a base model's predicted probability and $\omega_i$ the grid-searched weight; the authors test weight pairs in increments of 0.005 and report the optimum at $\omega_{\text{MobileNetV2}} = 0.45$, $\omega_{\text{NASNetMobile}} = 0.55$. Both base models use a transfer-learning scaffold: ImageNet-initialized weights, frozen early layers, and a task head of GlobalAveragePooling2D, Dropout, BatchNormalization, ReLU, and a sigmoid output. MobileNetV2 contributes depthwise separable convolutions with inverted residuals; NASNetMobile contributes cells found by neural architecture search. The mechanism does its work through error complementarity: the two networks disagree on a subset of images, and the weighted average moves enough of those disagreements to the correct side, cutting test error from 2.90% (MobileNetV2) or 3.75% (NASNetMobile) to 1.37%.

What would settle it

Retrain the two models with the same split and protocol, but choose the weights on a held-out validation partition (or via cross-validation) before touching the 586-image test set. If the accuracy on the untouched test set falls materially below 98.63%, or if the optimal weights move far from 0.45/0.55, the headline is a selection artifact. A second check is to run the fixed 0.45/0.55 ensemble on independent pediatric chest X-rays from another hospital and compare accuracy and AUC.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the Kermany pediatric chest X-ray benchmark, the weighted average ensemble (WAE) of NASNetMobile (weight 0.55) and MobileNetV2 (weight 0.45) reaches 98.63% accuracy, 98.66% weighted precision, 98.63% weighted recall, and 98.64% weighted F1 on the 586-image test set, with an AUC of 0.9977. In class-level terms it achieves 99.52% precision and 98.58% recall for pneumonia and 96.41% precision and 98.77% recall for normal, correcting 417 of 423 pneumonia images and 161 of 163 normal images. The paper presents this as an improvement over MobileNetV2 alone (97.10%), NASNetMobile alone (96.25%), and heavier architectures including ResNet50 (93.34%), InceptionV3 (94.71%), and DenseNet201 (97.78%). The authors attribute the gain to complementary feature extraction: MobileNetV2's inverted-residual depthwise separable convolutions capture fine detail cheaply, while NASNetMobile's search-derived cells pick up patterns suited to medical textures, so their weighted average cancels a share of the individual errors.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that choosing the ensemble weights by maximizing accuracy on the same 586-image test set used for the final report does not inflate the headline 98.63%; if the weights had been fixed before seeing the test labels, the reported gap over the base models could shrink.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The full ensemble stays under roughly 8.8 million base parameters, so the paired models can run on the same resource-constrained hardware as a single small CNN while reporting higher accuracy.
  • On the Kermany benchmark, the weighted pair makes heavy backbones such as ResNet50, InceptionV3, and DenseNet201 unnecessary when compute is limited, since the paper reports it outperforms them.
  • The methodology is a reusable template for other small binary medical imaging datasets: fine-tune several lightweight pretrained CNNs, keep the two best, and grid-search their blend.
  • The ensemble's improvement on the NORMAL class recall (from about 95.71% for MobileNetV2 to 98.77%) means it reduces false alarms relative to the stronger base model, which matters in screening workflows.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Because the optimal weights were grid-searched on the same 586-image test set that produced the headline accuracy, the published 98.63% is a selection result; fixing the weights before seeing the test labels would give the unbiased estimate.
  • The diversity between the two architectures may matter less than the averaging itself; comparing the reported ensemble against an ensemble of several MobileNetV2 checkpoints would isolate whether architecture diversity or ensembling drives the gain.
  • The 0.45/0.55 weights are fitted to one dataset and are unlikely to transfer unchanged to another hospital; a per-site calibration step would be a natural deployment requirement.
  • With only 586 test images, each image is roughly 0.17 percentage points of accuracy, so the difference between the reported 98.63% and a 97% result is about eight images; small test-set noise should be kept in mind when comparing models.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a weighted average ensemble (WAE) of two fine-tuned lightweight CNNs, MobileNetV2 and NASNetMobile, for binary pneumonia classification on the Kermany pediatric chest X-ray dataset. After fine-tuning MobileNetV2, NASNetMobile, and EfficientNetB0, the authors form an ensemble with weights (0.45, 0.55) and report 98.63% accuracy, 98.66% weighted precision, 98.63% recall, and 98.64% F1 on a 586-image test split, along with favorable comparisons against larger CNN baselines. The paper also describes image preprocessing, augmentation, transfer learning, and a grid-search procedure for determining the ensemble weights.

Significance. If the evaluation protocol were sound, a lightweight ensemble with accuracy in the high 90s on the well-known Kermany benchmark would be practically useful for resource-constrained pneumonia screening, and the paper's focus on lightweight models is well motivated. The manuscript gives a clear pipeline description, covers relevant related work, and reports class-level metrics. However, the central evaluation is compromised: the ensemble weights are selected by maximizing accuracy on the same test set used for the final evaluation, so the headline numbers are selection artifacts rather than unbiased performance estimates. This affects the main claim, the comparison against the base models, and the comparison against larger architectures in Figure 7.

major comments (3)
  1. [III.J, IV, V] The weight-selection procedure uses the test set directly. Section III.J states, 'The maximum accuracy is computed by evaluating the performance of the WAE model on test dataset,' and describes a grid search over weights in increments of 0.005 with the sum constrained to one (Eqs. 2 and 3). The 98.63% accuracy reported in Section IV is therefore the maximum of roughly 200 accuracy values computed on the same 586 test images, not an independent evaluation of a fixed model. This biases the headline number upward and invalidates the comparisons in Tables IV and V and Figure 7. The Discussion's claim in Section V that weights were 'determined based on validation performance' is not supported by the methodology, which describes only a 90/10 train/test split in Section III.A. The authors should select weights on a held-out validation set and report test accuracy for the resulting fixed ensemble.
  2. [IV, Tables IV-V] The reported advantage over the individual models is small in absolute terms. The WAE misclassifies 8 of 586 test images, MobileNetV2 misclassifies 17, and NASNetMobile misclassifies 22, so the claimed improvements are 9 and 14 images, respectively. With about 200 weight combinations evaluated on the test set, a gain of this size is exactly what test-set selection can produce. No confidence intervals, repeated-split results, or alternative weight-selection runs are provided to show that the margin is stable.
  3. [III.A, IV, Figure 7] The baseline comparisons are under-specified. Section III.A describes only the overall 90/10 split, and no validation split is defined. Section IV does not describe how ResNet50, InceptionV3, DenseNet201, MobileNetV3Large, or EfficientNetB2 were trained or evaluated for Figure 7, and the text refers to EfficientNetB2 while Table III reports EfficientNetB0 at 72.18%. The 72.18% value is surprisingly low for a transfer-learned EfficientNetB0 on this dataset and is not explained. Without the training and evaluation protocol for these baselines, the claim that the WAE outperforms state-of-the-art architectures cannot be assessed.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Table I] The Shear Range is given as 0.05 but the Description column says 'intensity of 0.1'; the two values should be reconciled.
  2. [III.A] The dataset split is described as 90% training and 10% testing, and the numbers 5,270 and 586 are consistent with that split, but the paper does not state whether the split was stratified; given the class imbalance (4,273 pneumonia versus 1,583 normal), this should be clarified.
  3. [Affiliations] The affiliation list contains two entries numbered 3; the second should be renumbered.
  4. [III.J and Section IV] The term 'weighted average' is used both for the ensemble combination in Eq. (2) and for the class-support-weighted metrics in Eq. (8); this double use is potentially confusing and should be disambiguated.
  5. [Reproducibility] No code, random seed, or data split file is provided, so the exact train/test split, augmentation, and fine-tuning procedure cannot be reproduced from the manuscript alone.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The reported 98.63% WAE accuracy is the maximum of a grid search for ensemble weights on the test set, so the headline result is a test-set-selected optimum rather than an unbiased prediction.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section III.J, Equations 2-3; result reported in Section IV, Table IV]
    "The maximum accuracy is computed by evaluating the performance of the WAE model on test dataset. Each model's predictions are combined using a weighted average, where the weights are systematically varied to identify the optimal combination. Specifically, a grid search over all possible weight combinations is performed, with weights ranging from 0 to 1 in increments of 0.005, ensuring that the sum of weights equals one (Equation 3)."

    Equation (2) defines the WAE prediction as the weighted sum of the base-model predictions, and the grid search selects the weights by maximizing accuracy on the 586-image test set. Table IV then reports the resulting best-grid accuracy (98.63%) as the model's performance. The reported number is therefore the value of the selection objective at the selected weights, not an independent evaluation of a fixed model on unseen labels. The claimed margin over MobileNetV2 (97.10%) and NASNetMobile (96.25%) is the difference between the base accuracies and the maximum over roughly 200 weight pairs on the same test images, so the ensemble improvement is not shown to be a genuine generalization gain.

full rationale

The base-model training and transfer-learning pipeline are not circular: MobileNetV2, NASNetMobile, and EfficientNetB0 are trained and evaluated on a normal split, and the individual model accuracies are independent reports. The central problem is the weighted-average ensemble's headline accuracy. The paper explicitly tunes the ensemble weights by grid searching on the test set and then reports the maximal test accuracy as the result. This is pattern 2, fitted input called prediction: the prediction (98.63%) is the optimized value of the same objective used to select the two weights. The self-citations in the paper are motivational and not load-bearing. The reduction is exhibited by the paper's own equations: Equation (2) defines the ensemble prediction, and Section III.J defines the weights as the maximizer of test accuracy; Section IV reports that maximum. No validation set is described in the dataset section (only a 90/10 train/test split), and no code or seed is provided to substantiate the later claim that weights were chosen on validation performance. The score is 6 because the central claim reduces by construction to a test-set fit, while the base models themselves retain independent content.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper adds no new theoretical machinery; it relies on standard transfer learning and a weighted average of two classifiers. The only fitted free parameters are the ensemble weights, which are tuned on the test set. The main axioms are domain assumptions about the dataset and the transferability of ImageNet features.

free parameters (2)
  • Ensemble weight for MobileNetV2 = 0.45
    Selected by grid search over weight combinations in increments of 0.005 to maximize accuracy on the test set (Section III.J).
  • Ensemble weight for NASNetMobile = 0.55
    Selected by the same grid search; weights sum to 1 (Section III.J).
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The Kermany dataset labels (pneumonia vs. normal) are accurate and the dataset is representative of pediatric chest X-rays.
    The entire training and evaluation is based on this public dataset (Section III.A); label noise or non-representativeness would invalidate the reported accuracies.
  • domain assumption ImageNet pretrained weights provide useful features for chest X-ray classification.
    The transfer learning approach (Section III.C, III.D) assumes features learned on natural images transfer to medical images despite the domain shift.
  • domain assumption The 90/10 split yields a test set that is independent of the training set and comparable to splits in prior work.
    The paper uses its own random split (Section III.A) without a seed; comparability to prior benchmarks is assumed in Figure 7.
  • domain assumption Data augmentation does not create overlap between training and test partitions.
    Augmentation is described in Section III.B after the split; if any augmented copies of test images entered training, the evaluation would be inflated.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Lightweight Weighted Average Ensemble Model for Pneumonia Detection in Chest X-Ray Images." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/3K2NQAAY

@misc{pith2026250116249,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Lightweight Weighted Average Ensemble Model for Pneumonia Detection in Chest X-Ray Images},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/3K2NQAAY}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.16249}
}
read the original abstract

Pneumonia is a leading cause of illness and death in children, underscoring the need for early and accurate detection. In this study, we propose a novel lightweight ensemble model for detecting pneumonia in children using chest X-ray images. This ensemble model integrates two pre-trained convolutional neural networks (CNNs), MobileNetV2 and NASNetMobile, selected for their balance of computational efficiency and accuracy. These models were fine-tuned on a pediatric chest X-ray dataset and combined to enhance classification performance. Our proposed ensemble model achieved a classification accuracy of 98.63%, significantly outperforming individual models such as MobileNetV2 (97.10%) and NASNetMobile(96.25%) in terms of accuracy, precision, recall, and F1 score. Moreover, the ensemble model outperformed state-of-the-art architectures, including ResNet50, InceptionV3, and DenseNet201, while maintaining computational efficiency. The proposed lightweight ensemble model presents a highly effective and resource-efficient solution for pneumonia detection, making it particularly suitable for deployment in resource-constrained settings.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.16249 by the authors.

Figure 2
Figure 2. FIGURE 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. FIGURE 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIGURE 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIGURE 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIGURE 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIGURE 7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. UltraLightSqueezeNet: A Deep Learning Architecture for Malaria Classification with up to 54x fewer trainable parameters for resource constrained devices

    cs.LG 2025-01 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

    Removing fire modules from SqueezeNet yields much smaller malaria classifiers with a modest accuracy drop, but the comparisons rest on single training runs.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

66 extracted references · 60 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/pneumonia

    work page

  2. [2]

    https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/household-air- pollution-and-health

    work page

  3. [3]

    Responding to the global human resources crisis

    Narasimhan V., Brown H., Pablos-Mendez A., et al. Responding to the global human resources crisis. The Lancet. 2004;363(9419):1469–1472. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(04)16108-

    work page doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(04)16108- 2004

  4. [4]

    [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

    work page

  5. [5]

    C., Eastwood J

    Naicker S., Plange-Rhule J., Tutt R. C., Eastwood J. B. Shortage of healthcare workers in developing countries. Africa, Ethnicity & Disease. 2009;19:p. 60. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

    work page 2009

  6. [6]

    X. Wang, Y. Peng, L. Lu, Z. Lu, M. Bagheri, R.M. Summers Chestx-ray8: hospital-scale chest x-ray database and benchmarks on weakly-supervised classification and localization of common thorax diseases Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (2017), pp. 2097-2106

    work page 2017

  7. [7]

    Towards Radiologist-Level Accurate Deep Learning System for Pulmonary Screening

    M. Haloi, K. R. Rajalakshmi, and P. Walia, Towards Radiologist- Level Accurate Deep Learning System for Pulmonary Screening, 2018, arXiv preprint arXiv:1807.03120

    work page Pith review arXiv 2018

  8. [8]

    Al-masni, M.A

    M.A. Al-masni, M.A. Al-antari, J.-M. Park, G. Gi, T.- Y. Kim, P. Rivera, et al. Simultaneous detection and classification of breast masses in digital mammograms via a deep learning YOLO- based CAD system Comput Methods Programs Biomed, 157 (2018), pp. 85-94

    work page 2018

Show all 66 references
  1. [9]

    LeCun, Y

    Y. LeCun, Y. Bengio Convolutional networks for images, speech, and time series Handb. Brain Theory Neural Netw., 3361 (1995), p. 1995

    1995

  2. [10]

    Effects of Artificial Intelligence Implementation on Efficiency in Medical Imaging—A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-analysis

    Wenderott, Katharina, Jim Krups, Fiona Zaruchas, and Matthias Weigl. "Effects of Artificial Intelligence Implementation on Efficiency in Medical Imaging—A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-analysis." Npj Digital Medicine 7, no. 1 (2024): 1-16. Accessed December 30, 2024. h...

    2024 doi

  3. [11]

    Comprehensive Evaluation and Insights into the Use of Large Language Models in the Automation of Behavior-Driven Development Acceptance Test Formulation

    Karpurapu, Shanthi, Sravanthy Myneni, Unnati Nettur, Likhit Sagar Gajja, Dave Burke, Tom Stiehm, and Jeffery Payne. "Comprehensive Evaluation and Insights into the Use of Large Language Models in the Automation of Behavior-Driven Development Acceptance Test Formulation." IEEE ...

    2024

  4. [12]

    Cypress Copilot: Development of an AI Assistant for Boosting Productivity and Transforming Web Application Testing

    Nettur, Suresh Babu, Shanthi Karpurapu, Unnati Nettur, and Likhit Sagar Gajja. "Cypress Copilot: Development of an AI Assistant for Boosting Productivity and Transforming Web Application Testing." IEEE Access (2024)

    2024

  5. [13]

    A Hybrid Deep Learning CNN Model for Enhanced COVID-19 Detection from Computed Tomography (CT) Scan Images

    Nettur, Suresh B., Shanthi Karpurapu, Unnati Nettur, Likhit S. Gajja, Sravanthy Myneni, Akhil Dusi, and Lalithya Posham. "A Hybrid Deep Learning CNN Model for Enhanced COVID-19 Detection from Computed Tomography (CT) Scan Images." ArXiv, (2025). Accessed January 31, 2025. http...

    2025 arXiv

  6. [14]

    UltraLightSqueezeNet: A Deep Learning Architecture for Malaria Classification with up to 54x Fewer Trainable Parameters for Resource Constrained Devices

    Nettur, Suresh B., Shanthi Karpurapu, Unnati Nettur, Likhit S. Gajja, Sravanthy Myneni, Akhil Dusi, and Lalithya Posham. "UltraLightSqueezeNet: A Deep Learning Architecture for Malaria Classification with up to 54x Fewer Trainable Parameters for Resource Constrained Devices." ...

    2025 arXiv

  7. [15]

    https://www.kaggle.com/datasets/paultimothymooney/chest-xray- pneumonia

  8. [16]

    Kermany, M

    D.S. Kermany, M. Goldbaum, W. Cai, C.C. Valentim, H. Liang, S.L. Baxter, A. McKeown, G. Yang, X. Wu, F. Yan et al., Identifying medical diagnoses and treatable diseases by image-based deep learning. Cell 172(5), 1122–1131 (2018)

    2018

  9. [17]

    Diagnosis of Pneumonia from Chest X- Ray Images Using Deep Learning,

    E. Ayan and H. M. Ünver, "Diagnosis of Pneumonia from Chest X- Ray Images Using Deep Learning," 2019 Scientific Meeting on Electrical-Electronics & Biomedical Engineering and Computer Science (EBBT), Istanbul, Turkey, 2019, pp. 1-5, doi: 10.1109/EBBT.2019.8741582

    2019

  10. [18]

    Thakur, S., Goplani, Y., Arora, S., Upadhyay, R., Sharma, G. (2021). Chest X-Ray Images Based Automated Detection of Pneumonia Using Transfer Learning and CNN. In: Bansal, P., Tushir, M., Balas, V., Srivastava, R. (eds) Proceedings of International Conference on Artificial Int...

    2021 doi

  11. [19]

    Pneumonia Detection in Chest X-ray Images Using Convolutional Neural Networks and Transfer Learning

    Jain, Rachna, Preeti Nagrath, Gaurav Kataria, V. Sirish Kaushik, and D. Jude Hemanth. "Pneumonia Detection in Chest X-ray Images Using Convolutional Neural Networks and Transfer Learning." Measurement 165, (2020): 108046. Accessed December 11, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.m...

    2020

  12. [20]

    Chhikara, Prateek & Singh, Prabhjot & Gupta, Prakhar & Bhatia, Tarunpreet. (2019). Deep Convolutional Neural Network with Transfer Learning for Detecting Pneumonia on Chest X-Rays. 10.1007/978-981-15-0339-9_13

    2019 doi

  13. [21]

    Sara Lee Kit Yee and Wong Jee Keen Raymond. 2020. Pneumonia Diagnosis Using Chest X-ray Images and Machine Learning. In Proceedings of the 2020 10th International Conference on Biomedical Engineering and Technology (ICBET '20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY...

    2020

  14. [22]

    El Asnaoui, K., Chawki, Y., Idri, A. (2021). Automated Methods for Detection and Classification Pneumonia Based on X-Ray Images Using Deep Learning. In: Maleh, Y., Baddi, Y., Alazab, M., Tawalbeh, L., Romdhani, I. (eds) Artificial Intelligence and Blockchain for Future Cyberse...

    2021 doi

  15. [23]

    Knok, Zeljko & Pap, Klaudio & Hrncic, Marko. (2019). Implementation of intelligent model for pneumonia detection. Tehnički glasnik. 13. 315-322. 10.31803/tg-20191023102807. 12

    2019 doi

  16. [24]

    A Transfer Learning Method with Deep Residual Network for Pediatric Pneumonia Diagnosis

    Liang, Gaobo, and Lixin Zheng. "A Transfer Learning Method with Deep Residual Network for Pediatric Pneumonia Diagnosis." Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine 187, (2020): 104964. Accessed December 11, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpb.2019.06.023

    2020 doi

  17. [25]

    An Efficient Deep Learning Approach to Pneumonia Classification in Healthcare

    Stephen O, Sain M, Maduh UJ, Jeong DU. An Efficient Deep Learning Approach to Pneumonia Classification in Healthcare. J Healthc Eng. 2019 Mar 27;2019:4180949. doi: 10.1155/2019/4180949. PMID: 31049186; PMCID: PMC6458916

    2019 doi

  18. [26]

    Raheel Siddiqi. 2019. Automated Pneumonia Diagnosis using a Customized Sequential Convolutional Neural Network. In Proceedings of the 2019 3rd International Conference on Deep Learning Technologies (ICDLT '19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 64–70. htt...

    2019

  19. [27]

    Omar, A.B.-P

    H. Omar, A.B.-P. Book, and undefined 2019, Detection of pneumonia from X-ray images using convolutional neural network, researchgate.net, Accessed: Apr. 14, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ozge-Doguc- 2/publication/344164531_Using_Dimensionality...

    2019

  20. [28]

    H. Wu, P. Xie, H. Zhang, D. Li, M. Cheng Predict pneumonia with chest X-ray images based on convolutional deep neural learning networks J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst., vol. 39 (2020), pp. 2893- 2907, 10.3233/JIFS-191438

    2020 doi

  21. [29]

    Rajaraman, S

    S. Rajaraman, S. Candemir, G. Thoma, S. Antani Visualizing and explaining deep learning predictions for pneumonia detection in pediatric chest radiographs Proc.SPIE (Mar. 2019), 10.1117/12.2512752

    2019 doi

  22. [30]

    Aich, H.-C

    S. Aich, H.-C. Kim, S. Chakraborty, J. Seong Sim, and H.-C. Kim 출처, Detection of Pneumonia from Chest X-Rays using a Convolutional Neural Network Architecture. Detection of Pneumonia from Chest X-Rays using a Convolutional Neural Network Architecture. 저자 (Authors).” [Online]. ...

  23. [31]

    Hasan, S.M.A

    Md.R. Hasan, S.M.A. Ullah, Md.E. Karim, 2023, An Effective Framework for Identifying Pneumonia in Healthcare Using a Convolutional Neural Network, 2023 International Conference on Electrical, Computer and Communication Engineering (ECCE), pp. 1–6, Feb. 2023, doi: 10.1109/ECCE5...

    2023

  24. [32]

    A Deep Feature Learning Model for Pneumonia Detection Applying a Combination of MRMR Feature Selection and Machine Learning Models

    Toğaçar, M., B. Ergen, Z. Cömert, and F. Özyurt. "A Deep Feature Learning Model for Pneumonia Detection Applying a Combination of MRMR Feature Selection and Machine Learning Models." IRBM 41, no. 4 (2020): 212-222. Accessed December 11, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irbm.2019.10.006

    2020 doi

  25. [33]

    A Novel Transfer Learning Based Approach for Pneumonia Detection in Chest X-ray Images

    Chouhan, Vikash, Sanjay Kumar Singh, Aditya Khamparia, Deepak Gupta, Prayag Tiwari, Catarina Moreira, Robertas Damaševičius, and Victor Hugo C. de Albuquerque. 2020. "A Novel Transfer Learning Based Approach for Pneumonia Detection in Chest X-ray Images" Applied Sciences 10, n...

    2020 doi

  26. [34]

    Efficient Pneumonia Detection in Chest Xray Images Using Deep Transfer Learning

    Hashmi, Mohammad F., Satyarth Katiyar, Avinash G. Keskar, Neeraj D. Bokde, and Zong W. Geem. "Efficient Pneumonia Detection in Chest Xray Images Using Deep Transfer Learning." Diagnostics 10, no. 6 (2020): 417. Accessed December 11, 2024. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics10060417

    2020 doi

  27. [35]

    Design ensemble deep learning model for pneumonia disease classification

    El Asnaoui, K. Design ensemble deep learning model for pneumonia disease classification. Int J Multimed Info Retr 10, 55–68 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13735-021-00204-7

    2021 doi

  28. [36]

    MiniNet: An efficient semantic segmentation ConvNet for real-time robotic applications

    I. Alonso, L. Riazuelo and A. C. Murillo, "MiniNet: An efficient semantic segmentation ConvNet for real-time robotic applications", IEEE Trans. Robot., vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 1340-1347, Aug. 2020

    2020

  29. [37]

    MobileNets: Efficient convolutional neural networks for mobile vision applications

    A. G. Howard et al., "MobileNets: Efficient convolutional neural networks for mobile vision applications", arXiv:1704.04861, 2017

    2017 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Automatic segmentation of abdominal adipose tissue in MRI

    T. H. Mosbech, K. Pilgaard, A. Vaag and R. Larsen, "Automatic segmentation of abdominal adipose tissue in MRI", Proc. Scand. Conf. Image Anal., pp. 501-511, 2011

    2011

  31. [39]

    Light- weight hybrid convolutional network for liver tumor segmentation

    J. Zhang, Y. Xie, P. Zhang, H. Chen, Y. Xia and C. Shen, "Light- weight hybrid convolutional network for liver tumor segmentation", Proc. 28th Int. Joint Conf. Artif. Intell., pp. 4271-4277, Aug. 2019

    2019

  32. [40]

    MobileNetV2: Inverted residuals and linear bottlenecks

    M. Sandler, A. Howard, M. Zhu, A. Zhmoginov and L.-C. Chen, "MobileNetV2: Inverted residuals and linear bottlenecks", Proc. IEEE/CVF Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recognit., pp. 4510-4520, Jun. 2018

    2018

  33. [41]

    MobileNetV2 model for image classification

    Dong, Ke, Chengjie Zhou, Yihan Ruan, and Yuzhi Li. "MobileNetV2 model for image classification." In 2020 2nd International Conference on Information Technology and Computer Application (ITCA), pp. 476-480. IEEE, 2020

    2020

  34. [42]

    Fruit image classification model based on MobileNetV2 with deep transfer learning technique

    Gulzar, Yonis. "Fruit image classification model based on MobileNetV2 with deep transfer learning technique." Sustainability 15, no. 3 (2023): 1906

    2023

  35. [43]

    Fruit image classification based on Mobilenetv2 with transfer learning technique

    Xiang, Qian, Xiaodan Wang, Rui Li, Guoling Zhang, Jie Lai, and Qingshuang Hu. "Fruit image classification based on Mobilenetv2 with transfer learning technique." In Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on computer science and application engineering, pp. 1-7. 2019

    2019

  36. [44]

    Early recognition of tomato gray leaf spot disease based on MobileNetv2-YOLOv3 model

    Liu, Jun, and Xuewei Wang. "Early recognition of tomato gray leaf spot disease based on MobileNetv2-YOLOv3 model." Plant Methods 16 (2020): 1-16

    2020

  37. [45]

    Face mask detection using MobileNetV2 in the era of COVID-19 pandemic

    Sanjaya, Samuel Ady, and Suryo Adi Rakhmawan. "Face mask detection using MobileNetV2 in the era of COVID-19 pandemic." In 2020 International Conference on Data Analytics for Business and Industry: Way Towards a Sustainable Economy (ICDABI), pp. 1-5. IEEE, 2020

    2020

  38. [46]

    SSDMNV2: A real time DNN-based face mask detection system using single shot multibox detector and MobileNetV2

    Nagrath, Preeti, Rachna Jain, Agam Madan, Rohan Arora, Piyush Kataria, and Jude Hemanth. "SSDMNV2: A real time DNN-based face mask detection system using single shot multibox detector and MobileNetV2." Sustainable cities and society 66 (2021): 102692

    2021

  39. [47]

    Multiclass classification of histology on colorectal cancer using deep learning

    A. M. K. Izzaty, T. W. Cenggoro, G. N. Elwirehardja and B. Pardamean, "Multiclass classification of histology on colorectal cancer using deep learning", Commun. Math. Biol. Neurosci., pp. 1- 19, Jul. 2022

    2022

  40. [48]

    Deep learning based application for indoor scene recognition

    M. Afif, R. Ayachi, Y. Said and M. Atri, "Deep learning based application for indoor scene recognition", Neural Process. Lett., vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 2827-2837, Mar. 2020

    2020

  41. [49]

    A Robust Approach for Brain Tumor Detection in Magnetic Resonance Images Using Finetuned EfficientNet,

    H. A. Shah, F. Saeed, S. Yun, J. -H. Park, A. Paul and J. -M. Kang, "A Robust Approach for Brain Tumor Detection in Magnetic Resonance Images Using Finetuned EfficientNet," in IEEE Access, vol. 10, pp. 65426-65438, 2022, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3184113

    2022

  42. [50]

    An EfficientNet-Based Weighted Ensemble Model for Industrial Machine Malfunction Detection Using Acoustic Signals,

    B. A. Tama, M. Vania, I. Kim and S. Lim, "An EfficientNet-Based Weighted Ensemble Model for Industrial Machine Malfunction Detection Using Acoustic Signals," in IEEE Access, vol. 10, pp. 34625-34636, 2022, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3160179

    2022

  43. [51]

    Automated medical diagnosis of COVID-19 through EfficientNet convolutional neural network

    Marques, Gonçalo, Deevyankar Agarwal, and Isabel De la Torre Díez. "Automated medical diagnosis of COVID-19 through EfficientNet convolutional neural network." Applied soft computing 96 (2020): 106691

    2020

  44. [52]

    Plant leaf disease classification using EfficientNet deep learning model

    Atila, Ümit, Murat Uçar, Kemal Akyol, and Emine Uçar. "Plant leaf disease classification using EfficientNet deep learning model." Ecological Informatics 61 (2021): 101182

    2021

  45. [53]

    Automated fruit recognition using EfficientNet and MixNet

    Duong, Linh T., Phuong T. Nguyen, Claudio Di Sipio, and Davide Di Ruscio. "Automated fruit recognition using EfficientNet and MixNet." Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 171 (2020): 105326

    2020

  46. [54]

    Brain tumor classification using dense efficient-net

    Nayak, Dillip Ranjan, Neelamadhab Padhy, Pradeep Kumar Mallick, Mikhail Zymbler, and Sachin Kumar. "Brain tumor classification using dense efficient-net." Axioms 11, no. 1 (2022): 34

    2022

  47. [55]

    Multi-label classification of fundus images with efficientnet

    Wang, Jing, Liu Yang, Zhanqiang Huo, Weifeng He, and Junwei Luo. "Multi-label classification of fundus images with efficientnet." IEEE access 8 (2020): 212499-212508

    2020

  48. [56]

    Combining efficientnet and vision transformers for video deepfake detection

    Coccomini, Davide Alessandro, Nicola Messina, Claudio Gennaro, and Fabrizio Falchi. "Combining efficientnet and vision transformers for video deepfake detection." In International conference on image analysis and processing, pp. 219-229. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2022

    2022

  49. [57]

    EfficientNet: Rethinking model scaling for convolutional neural networks

    M. Tan and Q. V. Le, "EfficientNet: Rethinking model scaling for convolutional neural networks", Proc. Int. Conf. Mach. Learn., pp. 6105-6114, 2019. 13

    2019

  50. [58]

    Learning transferable architectures for scalable image recognition

    B. Zoph, V. Vasudevan, J. Shlens and Q. V. Le, "Learning transferable architectures for scalable image recognition", Proc. IEEE/CVF Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recognit., pp. 8697-8710, Jun. 2018

    2018

  51. [59]

    Intelligent mobile plant disease diagnostic system using NASNet-mobile deep learning

    Adedoja, Adedamola O., Pius A. Owolawi, Temitope Mapayi, and Chunling Tu. "Intelligent mobile plant disease diagnostic system using NASNet-mobile deep learning." IAENG International Journal of Computer Science 49, no. 1 (2022): 216-231

    2022

  52. [60]

    Covid-19 symptoms detection based on nasnetmobile with explainable ai using various imaging modalities

    Ahsan, Md Manjurul, Kishor Datta Gupta, Mohammad Maminur Islam, Sajib Sen, Md Lutfar Rahman, and Mohammad Shakhawat Hossain. "Covid-19 symptoms detection based on nasnetmobile with explainable ai using various imaging modalities." Machine Learning and Knowledge Extraction 2, n...

    2020

  53. [61]

    Face attribute detection with mobilenetv2 and nasnet-mobile

    Saxen, Frerk, Philipp Werner, Sebastian Handrich, Ehsan Othman, Laslo Dinges, and Ayoub Al-Hamadi. "Face attribute detection with mobilenetv2 and nasnet-mobile." In 2019 11th international symposium on image and signal processing and analysis (ISPA), pp. 176-180. IEEE, 2019

    2019

  54. [62]

    Transfer Learning-Based Automatic Detection of Acute Lymphocytic Leukemia,

    P. K. Das and S. Meher, "Transfer Learning-Based Automatic Detection of Acute Lymphocytic Leukemia," 2021 National Conference on Communications (NCC), Kanpur, India, 2021, pp. 1- 6, doi: 10.1109/NCC52529.2021.9530010

    2021

  55. [63]

    Digital Diagnosis of Hand, Foot, and Mouth Disease Using Hybrid Deep Neural Networks,

    S. Verma, M. A. Razzaque, U. Sangtongdee, C. Arpnikanondt, B. Tassaneetrithep and A. Hossain, "Digital Diagnosis of Hand, Foot, and Mouth Disease Using Hybrid Deep Neural Networks," in IEEE Access, vol. 9, pp. 143481-143494, 2021, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3120199

    2021

  56. [64]

    Network In Network

    Lin, Min, Qiang Chen, and Shuicheng Yan. "Network In Network." ArXiv, (2013). Accessed December 4, 2024. https://arxiv.org/abs/1312.4400

    2013 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Dropout: a simple way to prevent neural networks from overfitting

    Srivastava, Nitish, Geoffrey Hinton, Alex Krizhevsky, Ilya Sutskever, and Ruslan Salakhutdinov. "Dropout: a simple way to prevent neural networks from overfitting." The journal of machine learning research 15, no. 1 (2014): 1929-1958

    2014

  58. [66]

    Batch normalization: Accelerating deep network training by reducing internal covariate shift

    Ioffe, Sergey. "Batch normalization: Accelerating deep network training by reducing internal covariate shift." arXiv preprint arXiv:1502.03167 (2015). SURESH BABU NETTUR has received his Master of Science (M.S) degree from the Birla Institute of Technology and Science (BITS), ...

    2015 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.