Classification of mammograms based on features extraction techniques using support vector machine

Computer Science and Information Technologies
Vol. 2, No. 3, November 2021, pp. 121~131
ISSN: 2722-3221, DOI: 10.11591/csit.v2i3.p121-131  121
Journal homepage: http://iaesprime.com/index.php/csit
Classification of mammograms based on features extraction
techniques using support vector machine
Enas Mohammed Hussein Saeed1
, Hayder Adnan Saleh2
, Enam Azez Khalel3
1,2
Department of Computer Science, Mustansiriya University, Baghdad, Iraq
3
Specialist Radiology Department-Oncology Teaching Hospitals, Medical City Complex, Baghdad, Iraq
Article Info ABSTRACT
Article history:
Received Oct 18, 2020
Revised Dec 9, 2020
Accepted Mar 8, 2021
Now mammography can be defined as the most reliable method for early
breast cancer detection. The main goal of this study is to design a classifier
model to help radiologists to provide a second view to diagnose mammograms.
In the proposed system medium filter and binary image with a global threshold
have been applied for removing the noise and small artifacts in the pre-
processing stage. Secondly, in the segmentation phase, a hybrid bounding box
and region growing (HBBRG) algorithm are utilizing to remove pectoral
muscles, and then a geometric method has been applied to cut the largest
possible square that can be obtained from a mammogram which represents the
region of interest (ROI). In the features extraction phase three method was
used to prepare texture features to be a suitable introduction to the
classification process are first Order (statistical features), local binary patterns
(LBP), and gray-level co-occurrence matrix (GLCM), Finally, support vector
machine (SVM) has been applied in two-level to classify mammogram images
in the first level to normal or abnormal, and then the classification of abnormal
once in the second level to the benign or malignant image. The system was
tested on the MAIS the mammogram image analysis society (MIAS) database,
in addition to the image from the Teaching Oncology Hospital, Medical City
in Baghdad, where the results showed achieving an accuracy of 95.454% for
the first level and 97.260% for the second level, also, the results of applying
the proposed system to the MIAS database alone were achieving an accuracy
of 93.105% for the first level and 94.59 for the second level.
Keywords:
Breast cancer
Classification
Cut the largest possible square
Features extraction
Digital mammography
Support vector machine
This is an open access article under the CC BY-SA license.
Corresponding Author:
Enas Mohammed Hussein Saeed
Department of Computer Science
Mustansiriya University
Baghdad, Iraq
Email: enas.saeed38@gmail.com
1. INTRODUCTION
Breast cancer is the most widespread disease that affects females during their lifetime, and the 2nd
leading death cause for women globally [1] according to the most recent statistical data that has been released
in 2015 in the USA, breast cancer occupies 29% of the new cases of cancer and 15% of the cancer death
cases [2]. Early detection is the optimal option for increasing treatment options, as there are many screening
methods for breast cancer detection such as biopsy, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), ultrasound, and
mammography [3]. Mammography is considered a common method for detecting abnormalities in the early
stages. Mammography is a low-dose X-ray application allowing to visualize the inner breast structure [4]. It’s
usually contained many artifacts and noises that make them difficult to understand in the initial stages.
Therefore, standardizing image quality and extracting region of interest (ROI) is necessary to reduce the search

 ISSN: 2722-3221
Comput. Sci. Inf. Technol., Vol. 2, No. 3, November 2021: 121 – 131
122
for distortions [5]. Visual examination of mammograms by a radiologist to detect breast cancer very command
but sometimes leads to less accurate diagnosis, due to the stress of the radiologist and low image quality. The
studies indicate that the error rate of 10% to 30% for diagnoses of malignant masses by a radiologist who
utilizes visual inspection. The error rate decreases significantly by utilizing the computer-aided detection
(CADe) system, which provides the support of the final decision and is considered as a second opinion with
radiology specialists diagnosis to classify breast tumors [6], [7]. Normally, there are five phases of the CADe
system for breast cancer detection as can be seen in Figure. 1 [8].
Figure 1. General phase for CADe system [8]
To achieve this goal, the medium filter was applied to remove noise, and local contrast, and then the
binary image with a global threshold applied for small artifacts removal. In the segmentation phase, a hybrid
bounding box and region growing (HBBRG) algorithm is utilizing to remove the pectoral muscles [9], and
then we find the largest possible square area that can be obtained from the breast, which represents the
ROI [10]. In the features extraction three feature extraction techniques were used are first Order, gray-level co-
occurrence matrix (GLCM), and local binary patterns (LBP), to acquire strong texture features that were
entered into the support vector machine (SVM) classifier at the classification phase. To conduct this search,
investigate it, and evaluating all its phases, a special database was established that relies mainly on MIAS
which has been proposed by the U.K. national program of breast screening. This database includes 322
digitized mammograms, 114 abnormal, and 208 normal which sub-dividing to 51 malignant and 63 Benign. A
1024x1024 pixel image with a "PGM" format [11]. The database is available on the website
http://peipa.essex.ac.uk/info/mias.html [12]. Also, in coordination with the Teaching Oncology Hospital /
Medical City / Baghdad, a set of images was obtained and added to the database. The pre-processing of these
images has also been performed to be in the same mammogram image analysis society (MIAS) database image
specification.
Theoretical consideration: Some many technologies and algorithms have been included in the stages
of the computer-aided design (CAD) system in this part. We will look at some of the techniques that were used
in our proposed method to extract and select features.
First order (statistical) features: Statistical texture analyses have been based upon the statistical
characteristics of the intensity histogram with no consideration of the spatial dependences. The image
histogram has given a statistical information summary concerning this image. The 1st order statistical image
information may be produced with the use of an image histogram [13]. It is a group of the useful features that
may be directly extracted from the spatial domain of the image histogram based on pixel values only, including
mean, standard deviation (SD), variance, kurtosis, and skewness [14]. These features have been calculated
using the following equations [15], [16]:
Mean = g ∑ P(g)
L−1
g=0 (1)
where g is grey level in the image (0 to 255)
Standard Deviation = √∑ (g − g
̅)2P(g)
L−1
g=0
2
(2)
where g
̅ is mean of gray level in the image

Comput. Sci. Inf. Technol. 
Classification of mammograms based on features extraction techniques… (Enas Mohammed Hussein Saeed)
123
Variance = ∑ (g − g
̅)2
P(g)
L−1
g=0 (3)
Skewness = ∑ (g − g
̅)3
P(g)
L−1
g=0 (4)
Kurtosis = ∑ (g − g
̅)4
P(g)
L−1
g=0 (5)
LBP features: This texture descriptor is very interesting it is texture descriptor is considered very
interestingly because particularly suitable for real-time quality controlling applications because it is fast and
easy to implement. It was expanded for the color image by Maenpaa and Pietik¨ainen and used in numerous
applications to classify problems based on color images [17], [18]. LBP indicates a relationship between a
central pixel and its adjacent pixels in Micro pattern LBP examined window to cells (for example 8x8 and 16
x 16 pixels for each cell). or every one of the pixels in a cell, compression to all pixels of its eight neighbors
(on the upper left, middle left, lower left, right top, and so on) as shown in Figure 2 which shows an example
of the original operator of the LBP. LPB follow pixels along the circle, that is, counterclockwise or clockwise.
Figure 2. An example of the original operator of the LBP [19]
The string ‘10000111’ is getting for 3*3 block with the central pixel 5. The binary form is transformed
to its 135 duplicates in a decimal form. LBP histograms are created from all micro patterns depend on a decimal
value. Assume that I is an image intensity and r = (x, y) ᵀ is a vector of position in I. The LBP b(r ∈ R ᴺⁿ) is
known as in the following description:
Bi(r) =1: if I(r) <I (r +Δ si), 0: otherwise, (i =1 Nn). Nn represents the number of the neighboring
pixels, and Δsi is vectors of displacement from the position of center pixel r to neighboring pixels [19].
GLCM features: GLCM is also a statistical method that takes into account the spatial relationship
between pixels. It has been employed widely in numerous applications based on texture analysis in the area of
texture analysis [20]. The probability of a pixel with a gray level of I occurring in terms of a particular spatial
relationship to another pixel j can always be calculated with GLCM. The size of the GLCM is located by how
many pixels are found in an image. The GLCM feature is applied based on four angles (0°, 45°, 90°, 135°
degrees) and displacement distance as shown in Figure 3 [21].In this paper, four features extracted from GLCM
are energy, contrast, correlation, and homogeneity. Those features have been calculated utilized by the
following (6).
Energy = ∑ p(i, j)2
n
i,j=1 (6)
where n is the Co-Occurrence matrix dimension, p is the probability of GLCM
Contrast = ∑ |i − j|p(i, j)
n
i,j=1 (7)
Correlation = ∑
(i−μi)(j− μj) p(i,j)
σiσj
n
i,j=1 (8)
where μx, μy, σx and σy represent the mean and standard deviation values [22].
Homogeneity = ∑
p(i,j)
1+(i−j)2
n
i,j=1 (9)

 ISSN: 2722-3221
124
Figure 3. Show adjacency of pixel in four directions
Related works: Many researchers completed early to diagnose breast cancer in an attempt to help
radiologists to detect abnormal tissue in the form of mammograms; we will review the most significant studies
in this area below: In 2017 Harefa et al. applied to pre-process for improving the image quality, and then the
segmentation stage has been applied depending on the database to obtain the ROI. Features are extracted by
using GLCM at 0o
, 45o
, 90o
, and 135o
with a 128 x 128 block size. In the procedure of the classification, this
study attempted at comparing the k-nearest neighbors (KNN) and SVM classifiers for achieving a higher level
of accuracy. The result shows that SVM outperforms KNN in breast cancer abnormalities classification with
93.88% accuracy [23].
In 2018 Sheba and Raj, in the proposed methodology for the pre-processing median filter, was utilized
for the noise filtering, global thresholding for removing the small artifacts [24]. BB is utilized for removing
pectoral muscles, and adaptive fuzzy logic based bi-histogram equalization to enhance the quality of the
mammograms for better perception. The ROI is automatically selected and segmentation from mammograms
image with the use of morphological operations and global thresholding. Shape, GLCM, and texture features
have been obtained from ROI, and then optimum features have been chosen with the use of classifier and
regression tree (CART). Finally, the classification step has been carried out with the Feed-forward artificial
neural network (ANN) utilizing the backpropagation. The proposed approach achieved 96% accuracy. In 2019
Mostafa et al. utilized few features than other previous research that used many feature sets, many techniques
have been used to reduce dimensions [25]. The KNN and ANN classifiers are used to classify these few
features. 50 cases of the 'BAHEYA Foundation to Early Detection and Treatment of Breast Cancer by doctors
and radiologists in the hospital have been utilized for the proposed system. The images used are contrast-
enhanced spectral mammograms (CESMs) that have clearer and more contrasting images compared to the
typical mammals. The KNN and ANN classifiers were used and the outcomes indicate to achieve accuracy
percent with 92 percent with ANN.
In 2019 Salman et al. have proposed a system for detect potential cancer tumors in mammograms, the
detection is made through automatically dividing breast images by combining hybrid density slicing technique
with the adaptive k-means algorithm, also by dividing breast images and extracting areas of cancer [26]. GLCM
have been used with proposed features that are gray level density matrices (GLDM) to detect abnormal tissue
using MLP classifiers. Experimental results showed a significant improvement in breast cancer diagnosis
accuracy with more than, 91.17%. In 2019 Vijayarajeswari et al, present a CAD system with the features
obtained with the use of the Hough transformation method, it is a 2-D transformation [27]. Which is utilized
for isolating the feature of a specific shape in the image. This study discusses strategies for the process of
classification and feature extraction. Here, it is utilized for the detection of the mammogram image features
and has been classified with the use of the SVMs. The results have shown that the suggested approach has been
successful in classifying the abnormal mammogram classes with an accuracy of 94%.
2. RESEARCH METHOD
The main goal of the present search is to build a classifier model to helps physicians and diagnostic
experts by providing a second diagnostic view for a more reliable diagnostic decision. Figure 4 illustrates the
diagram of the stages of the proposed classifier model.

125
Figure 4. Show diagram of the suggested system
2.1. Preprocessing
Mammography sometimes contains many errors like noise, small artifacts, and pectoral muscles.
These effects should be removed because they greatly affect the results of the following stages, such as feature
extraction. A median filter is used for noise and local contrast removal; it represents a filter of the spatial
domain, which works through replacing the central pixels in a certain block with block pixel median values.
The small artifacts have been eliminated through the conversion of the image into a binary format with the use
of a suitable threshold and after that, the arrangement of those components through the area for the isolation of
small spaces, which include the numbers and labels. The results which have been obtained from the application
of this stage have been illustrative in Figure 5.
Figure 5. Show results the pre-processing: (a) Input image; (b) After apply median filter; (c) Cut breast only;
(d) Image without noise and label
2.2. Segmentation
Many segmentation algorithms have been used on medical images. In this paper, this stage was
applied to remove pectoral muscles and cut the largest possible square from a mammogram, which represents
the ROI. Firstly, the HBBRG algorithm was used for the pectoral muscle removal by combining BB and RG.
Where BB algorithms were applied according to the fact that pectoral muscles are almost triangular and are
appearing in the breast contour’s upper left or corner according to whether it is the right or the left breast, then
the region's growing algorithm applied by selecting a seed point that will be automatically characterized to be
in the pectoral muscle limits. In addition to that, this function requires locating the distance of the maximal
intensity between the seed point and neighbor pixels, finally, the 2 methods have been combined to obtain the
HBBRG mask as shown in Figure 6.

 ISSN: 2722-3221
126
Figure 6. Results of the HBBRG algorithm: (a) Preprocessing image; (b) Cut breast only; (c) One's value for
breast; (d) Mask BB €. mask RG; (f) Merging between BB, and RG mask (HBBRG mask); (g) Improvement
mask HBBRG algorithm; (h) Integrates with the zero matrix's; (i) Inverse mask; (j) Output image
In the second phase, the breast image has been segmented to obtain the largest possible square area
that can be cut from the image, as this area is square, This process was applied using a geometrical method by
converting the image into the binary and finding the mask that contains only the breast with one's value and
then perform a reverse search process starts from the penultimate pixel in the lower right corner and compares
it with its three neighbors right, bottom and diagonal to find the least value between them and then increase its
value in one measure, this process continues on all the mask, then a square is drawn with the coordinates
starting from the smallest pixel to the largest value. Finally, to remove the black background all columns and
rows with a total sum equal to zero are excluded. Algorithm1 describes the process and Figure 7 illustrates
results.
Figure 7. Show results segment mammogram image: (a) Mammogram image; (b) Binary mask; (c) Largest
square mask; (d) Output largest square; (e) Remove black background (ROI)
Algorithm (1): Cut the largest possible square to find the ROI
Input: Mammogram image without pectoral muscles
Output: Image with the largest possible square
Begin
Step1: IM = read image.
Step2: Convert input image to binary
Step3: assign zero arrays (Mask1) with the size of the mammogram image
Step4: find a mask with one's value for breast only (mask2) from segmentation of the mammogram image
Step5: find pixels p(r, c) before the last for (Mask2), which is in the lower right corner, then apply
The following operations: a = p(r, c+1); b = p(r+1, c); d = p(r+1, c+1)
Temp = min ([a b d]); p(r, c) = Temp + 1.
Step6: Find the pixel that contains the maximum value in the formed array: max (p(r, c). Then apply
A following equation to find a square with white values, Mask3 (c: c +p(c, r), r: r+ p(c, r)) =1
Step7: for i= r to r +p (c, r)
Step8: for j= c to c + p(c, r)
Step9: IM= Multiply Mask3 (i, j) × IM (i, j)
Step10: end for
Step11: end for
Step12: counting the sum of pixels values for all rows and column and then find the min and max
For rows and columns containing a sum greater than zero
Step13: ROI = IM (min row: max row, min column: max column)
End
where r is the row, c is the columns, and Temp is the temporary tank.

127
2.3. Features extraction
In this phase, the ROI is assigned a set of features that represent the properties of the tissue. These
features can be a set of real numbers through which the normal tissue can be distinguished from the abnormal
and malignant from benign tissue. In this paper, after finding the ROI for each image the vector features consist
of 73 features that were calculated based on three techniques. Firstly, ten features of the first-order features are
(mean and SD of the mean, mean and SD of SD, mean and SD of variance, mean and SD of skewness, mean
and standard deviation of kurtosis), Secondly the fifty-nine feature of the LBP method which is listed from
eleven to sixty-nine features. Finally, four features of the GLCM are contrast, correlation, energy, and
homogeneity. All of those features were calculated with the aim of creating powerful texture features. The
steps for extracting these features are described in Algorithm 2.
Algorithm (2): Feature Extraction for the ROI
Input: ROI for images
Output: Array of features
Begin
Step1: Read ROI image I and Get row and column of the image I [r c].
Step2: For j =1to c
Step3: Find the mean, Standard deviation, variance, skewness, and kurtosis.
Step4: end for
Step5: features = [M (mean), SD (mean), M (standard deviation), SD (standard Deviation, M (variance),
SD(variance),M(skewness),SD(skewness), M(kurtosis),and SD(kurtosis)].
Step6: Find features LBP using it extractLBPFeatures (I)
Step7: Create a GLCM from Image I with (0°) and displacement d=1
Step8: Find features GLCM using its features = graycoprops (GLCM).
Step9: Find the Contrast of ROIs.
Step10: Find the Correlation of ROIs
Step11: Find the Energy of ROIs.
Step12: Find the Homogeneity of ROIs.
Step13: Save features
End
2.4. Classification
Once extracted the features, choose the appropriate ones to enter it into the SVM classifier. SVM has
been applied in two levels of binary classification, the first level representing the classification of image
features to a normal or abnormal image, then if the results of the first level are abnormal, the second level of
binary classification is applied, which classifies features of benign or malignant images. SVM can be defined
as a supervised ML classifier, where a reduced feature vector from the step of the features selection has been
provided as input data to SVMs classifier. It produces support vectors for the identification of boundaries
between both classes. This support-vector is utilized for the determination of the hyperplane position where it
has been tested with a variety of kernel functions. There is an infinite number of separating lines which may
be drawn, the objective is finding the “optimal” one, which means, one which has a minimal classification
error on the previously unseen tuples. The SVM has approached this issue by searching for maximal marginal
hyper-plane. The optimal splitting of a hyperplane is shown in Figure 8.
Figure 8. Optimal hyper plane for support vector machine

 ISSN: 2722-3221
128
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
The efficiency of the approaches of machine learning is evaluated based on some of the indices of the
performance measures. The result, false positive (FP), may put the patient in a fragile position however, using
complementary exams, the result may be excluded. While in a case where the results the false negative (FN) it
is a more worrying case if an individual has the lesion but the algorithm does not detect [28]. A confusion
matrix for the predicted and actual classes is carried out comprising FP, true positive (TP), FN, and false
negative (TN). In this classification, positive/negative indicates the decision which has been made by the
algorithm, and true/false indicates the way by which the decision agrees with the actual clinical state. Where
in case the two classes there are only four possible outputs represented elements of the confusion matrix of
(2*2) for a binary classifier see Figure 9 [29], [30].
Figure 9. An illustrative example of the 2*2 confusion matrix [29]
There are six statistical metrics utilized for the evaluation of the efficiency of the proposed system
based on the confusion matrix are accuracy (ACC), error rate (ERR), sensitivity (SN), false-positive rate (FPR),
specificity (SP), and precision (P). In the present research, the proposed system has been applied to all images
in the MIAS database, where 70% of the image was used for the training phase and 30% testing phase of
random instants of image features from the dataset with 100 iterations. The results show that SVM for the first
level has achieved the average, best, and worse accuracy they are 89.171%, 95.454%, and 79.293%,
respectively, see Table 1. Also, the results show that SVM for the second level has achieved the average, best,
and worse accuracy they are 90.493%, 97.60%, and 80.342%, respectively, as shown in Figure 10.
Table 1. Confusion matrix result of SVM for first-level
# ACC ERR SE FPR SP P
The average results 89.171 10.828 99.45 33.359 66.64 83.519
The best results 95.454 4.545 100 11.543 88.456 93.377
The worst results 79.281 20.717 86.301 47.058 52.941 73.856
Analysis of the performance of results of the evaluation metrics for a first-level classification which
classifies the image to normal or abnormal classes is shown in Figure 10, where it can be observed the best and
worst value obtained for this classifier.
Figure 10. Displays the performance analysis of the SVM for first level from Table 1

129
Table 2 shows Confusion matrix result of SVM for second-level. Analysis of the performance of
results of the evaluation metrics for a second-level classification which classifies the abnormal images only to
benign and malignant classes is shown in Figure 11, where it can be observed the best and worst value obtained
for this classifier.
Table 2. Confusion matrix result of SVM for second-level
# ACC ERR SE FPR SP P
The average results 89.171 10.828 99.45 33.359 66.64 83.519
The best results 95.454 4.545 100 11.543 88.456 93.377
The worst results 79.281 20.717 86.301 47.058 52.941 73.856
Figure 11. Displays the results and performance analysis of the SVM for second level
In this part, in order to better evaluate our proposed system, our proposed system was compared with
a set of previous works by comparing all the main stages of the system, algorithms, techniques, and the level
for which the system was designed without acres and the results obtained. These comparisons are shown in
Table 3.
Table 3. Shows the comparison of the proposed system with the related works
Related work
Pre-Processing
and Enhancement
Segmentation
Feature
extraction
Classifier Accuracy (%)
(Sheba, and
Raj,2018) [22]
median filter
global
thresholding
BB, global thresholding,
and morphological
Shape,
GLRLM, and
GLCM.
Feedforward
neural networks
(FFNN)
96 for the first and
second levels
(Salman, and
Semaa,2019) [24]
median filter
and histogram
equalization
Segmentation based
dataset, K-mean, and
RG
GLCM, and
GLDM
Feature
MLP
91.17 for the
second level
Vijayarajeswari
etl,2019) [25]
Remove all
unwanted part
maximization estimation
Hough
transform
SVM
94% for second
level
Proposed method
median filter
global
thresholding
HBBRG algorithm and
cutting largest possible
square
First-order,
LBP, and
GLCM.
SVM
95.454 For first
level, 97.260 for
second level
4. CONCLUSION
Mammography is the most effective method that is used in early detections of breast cancer, The main
objective is developing the CAD system for diagnosis mammogram images to assist doctors and diagnostic
experts by providing a second viewpoint, it gives more confidence to the diagnostic process. In this paper, The
results proved that the median filter is an ideal filter to remove noise and local contrast found in the
mammogram. The proposed algorithm for removing small artifacts has achieved 100% results for this purpose.
Removal of the pectoral muscles represents the biggest obstacle in the treatment of mammograms because they
closely resemble tumors and the rest of the breast tissue, particularly in the types of fatty and adenocarcinomas,
as well as their presence, has a great impact on the results of the following stages. A geometric segmentation
method was proposed to cut the largest possible square representing a sample of breast tissue, it achieving
100% success with normal images and more than 98% with abnormal images, where the tumor is within the
crop area. The proposed texture features are based on three technologies are first-order, LBP, and GLCM, these
features give the algorithm more robustness due to its resistance to many image situation variations that lead

 ISSN: 2722-3221
130
to the best discrimination potential for classification the type of image. Finally, several future research work
can be done for the production of our paper such as model development from the diagnostic model to the
diagnostic and prediction models, and tests of new segmentation methods that will provide better results to
identify the damage and insulation from the rest of our breast tissue, particularly in fatty and glandular photos,
during this stage, also apply the proposed breast diagnosis model to other breast imaging and examination
methods, like MRI and CT.
REFERENCES
[1] F. Bray, J. Ferlay, I. Soerjomataram, R. L. Siegel, L. A. Torre and A. Jemal, “Global cancer statistics 2018:
GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries,” CA: a cancer journal
for clinicians, vol. 68, no. 6, pp. 394-424, 2018, doi: 10.3322/caac.21492.
[2] Y. Qiu, et al., “An initial investigation on developing a new method to predict short-term breast cancer risk based on
deep learning technology,” Proceedings, Medical Imaging 2016: Computer-Aided Diagnosis, 2016, vol. 978, doi:
10.1117/12.2216275.
[3] A. Jalalian, S. B. T. Mashohor, H. R. Mahmud, M. I. B. Saripan, A. R. B. Ramli, and B. Karasfi, “Computer-aided
detection/diagnosis of breast cancer in mammography and ultrasound: a review,” Clinical imaging, vol. 37, no. 3, pp.
420-426, 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2012.09.024.
[4] I. K. Maitra, S. Nag, and S. K. Bandyopadhyay, “Technique for preprocessing of a digital mammogram,” Computer
methods and programs in biomedicine, vol. 107, no. 2, pp. 175-188, 2012, doi: 10.1016/j.cmpb.2011.05.007.
[5] A. Makandar and B. Halalli, “Pre-processing of mammography image for early detection of breast cancer,”
International Journal of Computer Applications, vol. 144, no. 3, pp. 11-15, 2016.
[6] M. A. Berbar, “Hybrid methods for feature extraction for breast masses classification,” Egyptian informatics journal,
vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 63-73, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.eij.2017.08.001.
[7] M. Tembey, “Computer-aided diagnosis for mammographic microcalcification clusters,” Ph.D. dissertation, Dept.
Comp. Sci. and Eng., Univ. of South Florida, Scholar Commons, 2003.
[8] H. D. Cheng, J. Shan, W. Ju, Y. Guo, and L. Zhang, “Automated breast cancer detection and classification using
ultrasound images: A survey,” Pattern recognition, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 299-317, 2010, doi:
10.1016/j.patcog.2009.05.012.
[9] E. M. H. Saeed and H. A. Saleh, “Pectoral Muscles Removal in Mammogram Image by Hybrid Bounding Box and
Region Growing Algorithm,” 2020 International Conference on Computer Science and Software Engineering
(CSASE), Duhok, Iraq, 2020, pp. 146-151, doi: 10.1109/CSASE48920.2020.9142055.
[10] P. S. Duth, V. Viswanath, and P. Sreekumar, “Brain image segmentation using level set: An hybrid approach,”
International Journal of Advances in Applied Sciences (IJAAS), vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 267-276, 2017, doi:
10.11591/ijaas.v6.i3.pp258-267.
[11] S. Li, T. Hara, Y. Hatanaka, H. Fujita, T. Endo, and T. Iwase, “Performance evaluation of a CAD system for detecting
masses on mammograms by using the MIAS database,” Medical Imaging and Information Sciences, vol. 18, no. 3,
pp. 144-153, 2001, doi: 10.11318/mii1984.18.144.
[12] J. Suckling et al., “The mini-MIAS database of mammograms,” [Online] Available:
http://peipa.essex.ac.uk/info/mias.html.
[13] A. Hussain, A. N. Mazher, and A. Razak, “Classification of Breast Tissue for mammograms images using intensity
histogram and statistical methods,” Iraqi Journal of Science, vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 1092-1096, 2012.
[14] K. N. N. Hlaing, “First order statistics and GLCM based feature extraction for recognition of Myanmar paper
currency,” Proceedings of the 31st IIER International Conference, Bangkok, Thailand. 2015, pp. 1-6.
[15] S. K. M Hamouda, R. H. A. El-Ezz, and M. E. Wahed, “Enhancement accuracy of breast tumor diagnosis in digital
mammograms,” Journal of Biomedical Sciences, vol. 6. no. 4, pp. 1-8, 2017, doi: 10.4172/2254-609X.100072.
[16] S. Maniar and J. S. Shah, “Classification of content based medical image retrieval using texture and shape feature
with neural network,” International Journal of Advances in Applied Sciences (IJAAS), vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 368-374,
2017, doi: 10.11591/ijaas.v6.i4.pp368-374.
[17] P. P. Dash, D. Patra, and S. K. Mishra, “Local binary pattern as a texture feature descriptor in object tracking
algorithm,” Intelligent Computing, Networking, and Informatics, vol. 243, pp. 541-548, 2014, doi: 10.1007/978-81-
322-1665-0_52.
[18] L. Nanni, A. Lumini, and S. Brahnam, “Local binary patterns variants as texture descriptors for medical image
analysis,” Artificial intelligence in medicine, vol. 49, no. 2, pp. 117-125, 2010, doi: 10.1016/j.artmed.2010.02.006.
[19] R. Nosaka, Y. Ohkawa, and K. Fukui, “Feature extraction based on co-occurrence of adjacent local binary patterns,”
Proceedings, Part II: Advances in Image and Video Technology - 5th Pacific Rim Symposium, PSIVT 2011, Gwangju,
South Korea, November 20-23, 2011, pp 82-91, doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-25346-1_8.
[20] F. R. De Siqueira, W. R. Schwartz, and H. Pedrini, “Multi-scale gray level co-occurrence matrices for texture
description,” Neurocomputing, vol. 120, no. 1, pp. 336-345, 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.neucom.2012.09.042.
[21] M. A. Al Mutaz, S. Dress, and N. Zaki, “Detection of masses in digital mammogram using second order statistics
and artificial neural network,” International Journal of Computer Science & Information Technology (IJCSIT), vol.
3, no. 3, pp. 176-186, June 2011.

131
[22] F. H. Mahmood and W. A. Abbas, “Texture Features Analysis using Gray Level Co-occurrence Matrix for
Abnormality Detection in Chest CT Images,” Iraqi Journal of Science, vol. 57, no. 1A, pp. 279-288, 2016.
[23] J. Harefa, Alexander, and M. Pratiwi, “Comparison classifier: support vector machine (SVM) and K-nearest neighbor
(K-NN) in digital mammogram images,” Jurnal Informatika dan Sistem Informasi, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 35-40, 2016.
[24] K. U. Sheba and S. G. Raj, “An approach for automatic lesion detection in mammograms,” Cogent Engineering, vol.
5, no. 1, pp. 1-16, 2018, doi: 10.1080/23311916.2018.1444320.
[25] S. Mostafa, R. Mubarak, M. El-Adawy, A. F. Ibrahim, M. M. Gomaa and R. M. Kamal, “Breast Cancer Detection
Using Polynomial Fitting Applied on Contrast Enhanced Spectral Mammography,” 2019 International Conference
on Innovative Trends in Computer Engineering (ITCE), Aswan, Egypt, 2019, pp. 11-16, doi:
10.1109/ITCE.2019.8646379.
[26] N. H. Salman and S. I. M. Ali, “Breast Cancer Classification as Malignant or Benign based on Texture Features using
Multilayer Perceptron,” International Journal of Simulation--Systems, Science & Technology, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 1-
11, 2019, doi: 10.5013/IJSSST.a.20.01.12.
[27] R. Vijayarajeswari, P. Parthasarathy, S. Vivekanandan, and A. A. Basha, “Classification of mammogram for early
detection of breast cancer using SVM classifier and Hough transform,” Measurement, vol. 146, no. 1, pp. 800-805.,
2019, doi: 10.1016/j.measurement.2019.05.083.
[28] R. F. d. S. Teixeira, “Computer analysis of mammography images to aid diagnosis,” MSc in Biomedical Engineering,
Faculdade de Engenharia da Universidade do Porto 35, 2012.
[29] A. Tharwat, “Classification assessment methods,” Applied Computing and Informatics, vol. 17. no. 1, pp. 168-192,
2020, doi: 10.1016/j.aci.2018.08.003.
[30] A. Sahu and S. Pattnaik, “Feature Selection Using Evolutionary Functional Link Neural Network for Classification,”
International Journal of Advances in Applied Sciences (IJAAS), vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 359-367, 2017, doi:
10.11591/ijaas.v6.i4.pp359-367
BIOGRAPHIES OF AUTHORS
Enas Mohammed Hussein Saeed received the B.Sc. in computer science from Mustansiriya Univ.,
Baghdad, Iraq in 1998, M.Sc. in computer science from computer science from Mustansiriyah
Univ., Baghdad, Iraq in 2004, and Ph.D. in computer science from Univ. of Technology, Baghdad,
Iraq in 2014.
Current position & Functions: computer science from Mustansiriyah University.
Official Email: drenasmohammed@uomustansiriyah.edu.iq
enas.saeed38@gmail.com
Hayder Adnan Saleh, a master’s student, College of Education, Department of Computer Science,
Al-Mustansiriya University.
an employee in the Iraqi Ministry of Education from 2009
The e-mail: haider8883gmail.com
Enam Aziz Khalel
MBCHB-DMRD
Specialist radiology
Head of radiology department -oncology teaching hospital- medical city complex
Enam_azez@yahoo.com

Classification of mammograms based on features extraction techniques using support vector machine

More Related Content

Similar to Classification of mammograms based on features extraction techniques using support vector machine (20)

More from CSITiaesprime (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Classification of mammograms based on features extraction techniques using support vector machine