Brain tumor detection and segmentation

using a wrapper based genetic algorithm for

optimized feature set

S. U. Aswathy, G. Glan Devadhas &

S. S. Kumar

Cluster Computing
The Journal of Networks, Software Tools
and Applications

ISSN 1386-7857

Cluster Comput
DOI 10.1007/s10586-018-1914-8

1 23
Your article is protected by copyright and
all rights are held exclusively by Springer
Science+Business Media, LLC, part of
Springer Nature. This e-offprint is for personal
use only and shall not be self-archived in
electronic repositories. If you wish to self-
archive your article, please use the accepted
manuscript version for posting on your own
website. You may further deposit the accepted
manuscript version in any repository,
provided it is only made publicly available 12
months after official publication or later and
provided acknowledgement is given to the
original source of publication and a link is
inserted to the published article on Springer's
website. The link must be accompanied by
the following text: "The final publication is
available at link.springer.com”.

1 23
 Author's personal copy
Cluster Computing
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10586-018-1914-8 (0123456789().,-volV)(0123456789().,-volV)

Brain tumor detection and segmentation using a wrapper based

genetic algorithm for optimized feature set
S. U. Aswathy1 • G. Glan Devadhas2 • S. S. Kumar3

Received: 8 December 2017 / Revised: 8 January 2018 / Accepted: 19 January 2018

 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Abstract
The work here intends to develop an algorithm for optimizing the available feature set for identifying tumor from brain
MRI images. A set of features are selected based on texture features. From the large set of features relevant features would
be selected using wrapper approach. Further, an optimized subset of the relevant features is generated with the help of
Genetic Algorithm. The machine learning with support vector machine algorithm is used for detection and segmentation of
tumors in the brain MRI image acquired. The superiority of the algorithm is established by comparing it with the state of
the art algorithms such as level set method and fuzzy based methods. The authors are using performance measurement tools
including manual segmentation and volume based tools for validating the claim.

Keywords Segmentation  Genetic algorithm  Wrapper method  Support vector machine

1 Introduction
Based on the current scenario, a tumor is the second cause
of cancer related death in the world for both male and
female [1]. This fact increases the importance of research
in the field of tumor detection, which helps the doctors for
early detection of disease and to perform necessary actions
[2]. Now day’s a large variety of image processing tech-
niques are available, which can detect certain features of
the tumors such as the shape, size, border, calcification etc.
[3]. These extracted features will help to make the seg-
mentation process more accurate and precise. In medical
ethics, tumors can also be named as neoplasm [4]. The
tumor can be defined as the abnormal growth of normal
body tissue, which can be differentiated from the sur-
rounding body tissue by its shape and structure. In the
beginning stage all tumors will be very small and they
& S. U. Aswathy
noorulaswathi98@rediffmail.com
1
Department of Computer Science, Noorul Islam University,
Kanyakumari, India
2
Electronics and Instrumentation, Vimal Jyothi Engineering
College, Kannur, Kerala, India
3
Electronics and Instrumentation, Noorul Islam University,
Kanyakumari, India
grow with time [5]. As they grow, it will become more
conspicuous and start showing their characters [6]. A per-
son with tumors usually shows certain symptoms and that
will bring the person to a physician. From this, they will be
able to detect the smallest possible symptom of malignant
tumors (cancerous) and benign tumors (non-cancerous) in
the screening process itself [7].
2 Related works
There exist different methods for the image segmentation
and processing. These methods can be supervised, semi
supervised and unsupervised [8]. Zhang et al. [3] proposed
a new method known as hidden Markov random field
(HMRF) model. This model has the ability to encode both
the spatial and statistical properties of a given image. When
compared with existing methods, it is more flexible for
image modelling. The limitation of this system is that its
preliminary estimations is based on threshold value which
is purely heuristic and its time consuming. It gives inac-
curate results most of the time. Tolba et al. [4] proposed a
new method for MRI brain image segmentation known as
Gaussian Multi-Resolution Expectation Maximization
algorithm [9]. This algorithm is based on EM algorithm
and the multiresolution analysis of the given image [10].

123
 Author's personal copy
The limitation of this technique is that miss-classified pixel
is generated when this algorithm is applied to pixel laying
in the edges of boundaries. Taheria et al. [5] introduced a
model based on a threshold value that uses level set
methods for 3D brain tumor segmentation.
In this proposed model, the speed function of the level
set was designed using a general threshold [11]. Zadeh
et al. [3] in their paper explain the number of fuzzy clus-
tering methods based on fuzzy set theory. Fuzzy c Mean
(FCM) algorithm assign every pixel to the clusters without
any label, however the algorithm fails to succeed com-
pletely to segment image having noise, images having the
intensity difference, artefacts’ [12]. To overcome these
draw back modified FCM algorithm was proposed. Sel-
vathi and Anitha [13] proposed a method to overcome the
intensity in homogeneity. Though this algorithm work well
in medical image segmentation, it has some limitation such
as, time required for segmentation is more due to its
complexity in spatial and additional terms.
This paper recommends fully automatic and effective
tumor segmentation based on SVM classifier and wrapper
Input image
Pre -processing
Feature Extraction
Feature subset (wrapper
based)
Svm classifier Validation
Best Feature subset
Fig. 1 Block diagram for the proposed method
123
Cluster Computing
based genetic algorithm [14]. The proposed method is a
block process integrated with the classifier to segment the
tumor region from MRI [15]. In this proposed method,
truth image of the input is taken and texture features and
histogram based features are extracted [16]. Feature
selection is done by using genetic algorithm, feature subset
selection is done by wrapper method, these selected fea-
tures are used to train the classifier [17]. The sum of the
total block output gives the classified region.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows [18]. In
Sect. 3 gives an idea of the method overview (Fig. 1). In
Sect. 4 some experimental analysis with the existing system
and in Sect. 5 comparative analysis with manual delineation
is done, and finally in Sect. 6 we conclude the paper.
3 Method overview
In proposed system pre-processing of the image is done for
background separation so as to get the ROI. The set of
features are extracted using first order histogram
Morohologicaloperations
Thresholding
First order histogram
Co-occurrence Matrix
Cross over
Mutation
Fitness Function
Is Termi
nation
 Author's personal copy
Cluster Computing
Fig. 2 Output stages for pre-
processing
techniques and co-occurrence matrix. The relevant features
selection from the available feature set is done by wrapper
method [19]. The Genetic algorithm is incorporated as a
wrapper based model in the proposed algorithm. In each
generation the population is evaluated and tested with the
termination algorithm [20]. If it fails the cross over,
mutation and fitness computation steps are repeated.
Finally classification of pixel to tumor and non tumor
region is done by SVM classifier.
3.1 Pre-processing
The pre-processing of the image is done so as to improve
the finer form of the image and to remove unnecessary
noise present. In the proposed algorithm background sep-
aration is done to obtain the region of interest. In the below
Fig. 2, the major steps included in the preprocessing stage
are thresholding, region filling and morphological
operations.
3.2 Feature extraction
To represent an image, large amount of data is needed
which in turn require more memory and time. In order to
reduce this large amount of data memory and time we go
for feature extraction. The extracted features contain the
relevant information of an image. These feature extracted
are said to contain the properties that describe the whole
image. Moreover, it also refer as an important piece of
information which is relevant for solving the computational
task related to specific application. The purpose of feature
extraction is to reduce the original dataset by measuring
certain features. These extracted features are fed as an
input to the classifier for image classification and seg-
mentation. There are various types of feature extraction
such as intensity based, shape based and texture based
feature extraction. In our proposed system we are using
texture based feature extraction.
3.2.1 Texture based feature extraction
Texture refers to surface characteristics and appearance of
an object given by the size, shape, density, arrangement,
proportion of its elementary parts. A basic stage to collect
such features through texture analysis process is called as
texture feature extraction. Four categories of extracting
textural features are: (1) statistical methods (2) structural
methods (3) model based methods (4) transform-based
methods, of these we are using statistical method for fea-
ture extraction.
3.2.1.1 Histogram based feature extraction Histogram
based feature extraction depend only on individual pixel
values and not on the interaction or co-occurrence of
neighbouring pixel values The histogram-based features
used in this proposed system are first order statistics that
include mean, variance, skewness and kurtosis. Let z be a
random variable denoting image gray levels and p(zi),
i = 0,1,2,3,…,L - 1, be the corresponding histogram,
where L is the number of distinct gray levels. The features
are calculated using the above-mentioned histogram.
3.2.1.2 Co-occurrence matrix based features Texture
feature computed using histograms suffer from the limita-
tion that they carry no information regarding the relative
position of the pixels with respect to each other, this can be
overcome using co-occurrence based feature extraction.
The second-order gray level probability distribution of a
texture image can be calculated by considering the gray
levels of pixels in pairs at a time. A second-order proba-
bility is often called a GLC probability. Texture feature
calculations use the contents of the GLCM to give a
measure of the variation in intensity at the pixel of interest.
The co-occurrence matrix is computed based on two
parameters, which are the relative distance between the
pixel pair d measured in pixel number and their relative
orientation. Normally, is quantized in four directions (e.g.,
0, 45, 90 and 135), even though various other combi-
nations could be possible. The various features that can be
calculated from the co-occurrence matrices are contrast,
absolute value, inverse difference, energy, and entropy.
3.3 Feature selection by wrapper based genetic
algorithm
The probability of getting an optimal feature subset for
classification is high when GA is employed for feature
selection with suitable fitness functions and possible
123
 Author's personal copy
Input feature
Feature
Feature
subset evaluation
No
Term
ina
Yes
validation
Fig. 3 Block diagram showing validation of wrapper based GA
considerations. Taking these advantages, a feature selec-
tion scheme based on genetic algorithm is proposed. The
proposed wrapper based feature selection method takes the
advantage of the supervised learning algorithm to evaluate
the significance of the feature subset and employs the
genetic algorithm to optimize the searching of features in
the feature selection process.
The wrapper method is a random search technique used
for selecting the relevant subset features from the available
feature set. In the above Fig. 3, the features will be con-
sisting of redundant data set. Here the selection of a set of
features will be carried out based on the relevance. It
considers the set of features as a search problem. The
different combinations of features are prepared, evaluated
and compared to other combinations. The stopping condi-
tion could be with generating and evaluating new feature
subsets when adding or removing features does not make
any performance improvements i.e.
(i) A predefined number of features are selected.
(ii) A predefined number of iterations are reached.
(iii) Addition or deletion of a feature which fails to
produce better subset.
(iv) An optimal subset obtained according to evalua-
tion criteria.
The Genetic algorithm is incorporated as a wrapper
based model in the proposed algorithm. In each generation
123
Cluster Computing
the population is evaluated and tested with the termination
algorithm. If it fails the crossover, mutation and fitness
computation steps are repeated.
3.3.1 Proposed feature selection algorithm
Genetic algorithm (GA) is a method for moving to a new
population from an existing population of chromosomes
using a natural selection method. It has two operators,
namely crossover and mutation. Crossover exchanges
subparts of two chromosomes or it performs recombination
between two single chromosomes. Mutation randomly
changes the all values of some locations in the chromo-
some. GA evaluates the fitness of each and every individ-
ual; this means that the superiority of the results is achieved
through a fitness function. The suitable chromosome has a
higher probability to choose for the next generation
formation.
3.3.1.1 Genetic algorithm It is an optimization approach
to minimize an objective function based Darwin’s theory of
evolution that mimics the natural selection, crossover and
mutation process [Holland]. The best subset of features are
prepared through GA algorithm by avoiding all the
redundancies.GA is a stochastic optimization method,
which is based on meta heuristic search procedures which
starts with a matrix of population of solution set. In the
Table 1, each row of this matrix shows the individuals or
genes that generated randomly with each gene is displaying
a solution of an objective function. Using a objective
function, fitness of individuals are computed according to
an objective function. Population is improved by cross over
function which is a combination of genetic information
from different members of population. Another population
improvement method is mutation, wher some individuals
of population are mutated according to the mutation rate of
population. Pseudo code of GA is show in Algorithm 1.
 Author's personal copy
Cluster Computing

Table 1 Feature extraction for

Image Type Random block index Mean Variance Skewness Kurtosis Entropy Target
randomly selected blocks
(FLAIR & T2 images) FLAIR 10,458 128 2.1E -05 - 85129.86 3.2E?13 2.9E -12 0
5401 818.7 14190.2 - 0.80904 1.65461 0.89604 1
22,466 385 2.1E -05 - 255280.5 3.2E?13 2.9E -12 0
1196 128 2.1E -05 - 85129.86 3.2E?13 2.9E -12 0
5882 642 2.1E -05 - 425104.5 3.2E?13 2.9E -12 1
24,137 385 2.1E -05 - 255280.5 3.2E?13 2.9E -12 0
5108 128 2.1E -05 - 85129.86 3.2E?13 2.9E -12 0
11,408 368.9 3870.06 - 3.614785 14.0676 0.33729 1
20,312 385 2.1E -05 - 255280.5 3.2E?13 2.9E -12 0
14,222 385 2.1E -05 - 255280.5 3.2E?13 2.9E -12 0
T2 14,222 385 2.1E -05 - 255281 3.2E?13 2.9E -12 0
10,458 128 2.1E -05 - 85129.9 3.2E?13 2.9E -12 0
5401 931 7224.11 2.267787 6.14311 0.54356 1
5979 128 2.1E -05 - 85129.9 3.2E?13 2.9E -12 0
8050 385 2.1E -05 - 255281 3.2E?13 2.9E -12 0
9667 1413 2.1E -05 - 930466 3.2E?13 2.9E -12 1
11,520 128 2.1E -05 - 85129.9 3.2E?13 2.9E -12 0
5882 546 15480.2 - 0.5164 1.26672 0.95443 1

The proposed methods for generating feature subset can
reduce the curse of dimensionalities to a great extent.
3.4 SVM based segmentation
SVM is generalized statistical learning theory which is
used for classifying the set of inputs based on supervised
learning theory. It separates the set of inputs into two
classes with class labels - 1 and 1. The classifier separates
into classes by defining a hyper plane defined by
f(x) = bT x ? a where b [ Rn is orthogonal to the hyper
plane and a [ Rn is a constant. For the set of training
feature set f(ai,bj) defined in the form f ða; bÞ ¼ f ai ; bi Þ=
ai 2 <m ; bi 2 ð0; 1Þg i¼1 : n : Here ai is the input vector and
bi is the target vector with two classes with class label 0
and 1. SVM training will maximize the distance between
the classes by defining the hyper planes with a small
empirical risk. The hyper planes for the classes can be
 
represented as bi bT a þ a  1: The objective function
for optimizing the distance between the classes defined by
the hyper planes can be represented as minimize : Pðb;
Pn
a; eÞ ¼ 0:5 kbk þ C ei ; where ei is a set of slack vari-
i¼1
ables and C is a cost variable for each slack variable.
Proposed SVM based segmentation consists of two
parts. (1) Testing and (2) training. Firstly the image is
divided into blocks and features extracted from each block
are arranged in the feature matrix. A truth vector is formed
from the corresponding truth image. This matrix is used to
train the classifier. SVM classifies data by finding the best
hyperplane that separates all specific data points of one
class from those of the other. The finding of the hyper
plane and the corresponding support vector is called
Training. For segmentation, the test image undergoes the
feature extraction. Feature Selection is done with the help
of wrapper based GA. These selected features are used for
SVM classifier training. Here SVM classifier is trained to
classify a tumor region and abnormal region (Fig. 4). This
classification takes place block wise, and the sum total of
the classified blocks can give out the classified region.
4 Comparative analysis with existing
methods and with manual delineation
Proposed method is compared with two existing methods
such as Expectation maximization using level set and
advanced fuzzy c mean method (Fig. 5).
4.1 Expectation maximization with level set
method
EM algorithm helps to find out the maximum possible
likelihood measures of parameters in statistical models.
The EM algorithm has two steps, an expectation (E) step,
which will generate a function for the expectation stage and
is calculated by using the present estimate for the param-
eters. The other one is maximization (M) step, which

123
 Author's personal copy
Cluster Computing

Index Machine
Pre processing& Learning
Data Feature Algorithm
Block Division
Base Extractor
Features

Feature Enter block Segmented

Data SV
Extractor white output
Base M
features

Fig. 4 Flowchart for training and Testing of SVM based segmentation method

Fig. 5 Output for SVM

segmentation for FLAIR and T2
images

evaluates parameters maximizing the anticipated log like-
lihood that is found on the E step.
Expectation maximization is performed based on the
number of classes represented by k and an image I. Based on
the histogram of the image I and the number of classes K, A
(0) is initially estimated. E-step and M-step is performed
until it converges, E-step compute the probability class of
each pixel based on the current estimation of A(t) at each
iteration and M-step determine the new expectation of A
(t ? 1), based on values of E-step. Classification matrix C is
generated as a result. Finally based on the classification
matrix C, segmented image is generated.
4.2 Level set method
It’s a numerical technique or tool for tracking interfaces
and shapes. The level set method is a general method
which will be made application specific by the use of a
priori information. In this the boundaries are the curves that
separate the regions or objects. A curve is represented
implicitly as the zero level set of a time dependent func-
tion: X ? R, such that C = {x(t) [ X: (x, t) = 0 (Fig. 6).
The curve moves under the influence of a speed law. A
special case is when the motion is restricted to the normal
direction of the curve, i.e. dx/dt = Fn, where the scalar
function F is termed as speed function.

123
 Author's personal copy
Cluster Computing

Fig. 6 Output for FLAIR and

T2 images for the combination
of EM and Levelset method

In the level set method, firstly we initialize the level set N X

X C  2
Jm ¼ um  
function A. Local means updation is done by using the ij xi  cj ; 1  m\1
r xðyxÞI ðyÞMi;e ð;ððyÞÞdy i¼1 j¼1
formula UiðxÞ ¼ ; which is followed by
r xðyxÞMi;e‘ ð;ððyÞdy
where m is any real number greater than 1, uij is the degree
Updation of local variance using ri x 2 ¼ of membership of xi in the cluster j, xi is the ith of d-
r xðyxÞðui‘ ðxÞIc Mi;e ð;ððyÞÞdy dimensional measured data, cj is the d-dimension center of
: Then the updation of set function
r xðyxÞMi;e ð;ððyÞÞdy
the cluster, and ||*|| is any norm expressing the similarity
A is done by the equation oo;t ¼ deð;Þðe1  e2 Þ þ between any measured data and the center.Fuzzy parti-
     tioning is carried out through an iterative optimization of
vdeð;Þdiv r
rh
;
þl r 2
;  div r;
rh ). This process is
the objective function shown above, with the update of
repeated, untill the convergence criteria is met. membership uij

4.3 Fuzzy C-mean (FCM) P

N
um
ij  xi
1 i¼1
uij ¼  2 cj ¼
FCM algorithm is a clustering algorithm developed by P
C
kxi cj k m1 PN
um
ij
Dunn, and later on improved by Bezdek. It is useful when k¼1
kxi ck k i¼1
the required number of clusters are pre-determined; thus,
the algorithm tries to put each of the data points to one of and the cluster centers cj by:This iteration will stop when
n o
the clusters. FCM can be extremely fast because the ðkþ1Þ ðkÞ
maxij uij  uij \e, where e is a termination crite-
number of iterations required to achieve a specific clus- rion between 0 and 1, whereas k are the iteration steps. This
tering exercise corresponds to the required accuracy. Fuzzy procedure converges to a local minimum or a saddle point
c mean is based on minimization of the following objective of Jm.
function:

123
 Author's personal copy
Cluster Computing

5 Experimental analysis with the existing
method and with manual delineation
For the performance evaluation, a series of 30 images of
both FLAIR and T2 (23 abnormal and 7 normal) were
taken into consideration, of these 95 objects were used in
training and 30 objects were used in testing phase. These
images are segmented with a common threshold value, in
association to the radiologist segmented image. The four
parameters- true positive (TP), false positive (FP), true
negative (TN), false negative (FN) are evaluated by the
logically AND ing the ground truth and segmented image.
For the numerical analysis, the number of FN and FP are
calculated, based on the number of pixels in the interested
region (ROI). The proposed system have been imple-
mented by using MATLAB software with a computer
segmentation. The results are evaluated by comparing it
with the result of manually segmented data done by med-
ical experts. The degree of similarity of the segmented
results gives the accuracy of the segmented image. The
result is obtained in terms of specificity, accuracy, Abso-
lute volume measurement error (AVME) and figure of
merit (e), helps to demonstrate the validity of the
proficiency.
1. Specificity = True negative/(true negative ? false
positive): d = TN/(TN ? FP).
2. Accuracy = (True negative ? true positive)/total
samples: A = (TN ? TP)/(TN ? TP ? FN ? FP).
 
3. Absolute volume measurement error ¼ VVautomatic
manual
 1
100%
4. Figure of merit ðeÞ ¼ 1  jVmanualVmanual
Vautomatic j

specification of core 2duo having a processor speed of

1.6 GHz. Supervised evaluations is carried out to figure out Gives idea about the feature extracted from the ran-
the difference between the ground truth and the segmen- domly selected block for the multimodality images (FLAIR
tation result using the evaluation metric. In the Tables 2, 3, & T2). First column contains the index of the block ran-
4, and 5 the ground truth is obtained from manual domly selected for the sake of illustration. The columns 2

Table 2 Statistical comparison

Data FLAIR T2
for the FLAIR, T2 input in
terms of specificity EM ? level set FCM SVM EM ? level set FCM SVM

1 97.202 57.7914 100 10.679036 0.10644 0.687467

2 97.1383 57.0374 100 11.280992 0.10334 0.701177
3 96.8692 54.8225 100 10.734473 0.095835 0.683585
4 97.2801 58.4199 99.9413 10.589031 0.108671 0.652442
5 97.3814 58.8072 99.9568 11.895542 0.107736 0.960127

Table 3 Statistical comparison

Data EM ? level set FCM SVM EM?level set FCM SVM
for the multimodality input
image in terms of Accuracy 1 98.6777 90.4845 99.2594 98.2841 97.1628 98.3638
2 98.8108 92.7889 99.2405 98.3709 98.3927 98.3694
3 98.8223 91.524 99.3658 98.1829 96.9102 98.2776
4 98.5446 93.6795 98.8777 97.5781 97.5621 97.5792
5 98.7558 94.221 99.0586 97.7344 98.021 97.7158

Table 4 Statistical comparison

Data FLAIR T2
for multimodality input image
in terms of time elapsed EM ? level set FCM SVM EM ? level set FCM SVM

1 10.679036 0.10644 0.687467 11.978129 0.247004 0.463591

2 11.280992 0.10334 0.701177 10.423795 0.072135 0.231283
3 10.734473 0.095835 0.683585 11.876344 0.080558 0.254667
4 10.589031 0.108671 0.652442 12.5050741 0.104623 0.329427
5 11.895542 0.107736 0.960127 10.452851 0.074604 0.243118

123
 Author's personal copy
Cluster Computing

Table 5 Comparative analysis of Volume measurement for EM ? Level set, FCM, SVM
Data Volume measurement of automatic segmentation Volume measurement of absolute segmentation
EM ? Level Set FCM SVM EM ? Level Set FCM SVM

1 78,407 18,432 27,007 251.5851 - 17.35 21.102

2 74,201 14,679 9232 507.0605 20.093 - 24.47
3 35,383 29,742 22,821 16.45657 - 2.11 - 24.889
4 957,832 7623 11,453 9792.915 - 21.27 18.292
5 108,800 18,789 3271 923.5183 76.754 - 69.229

Table 6 Statistical comparison of input images in terms of Figure of methods. Statistical comparison and tumor volume calcu-
Merit lation from Table 5 for the proposed algorithm shows the
Data SVM FCM EM ? level set efficiency. The time required for processing each image for
10 patients for T2 and FLAIR is plotted as graphs in Fig. 7.
1 0.788978 0.82651 - 1.51585
Figure 8 shows the statistical evaluation, showing speci-
2 0.755297 0.799067 - 4.0706
ficity and accuracy of multimodality images. The perfor-
3 0.751111 0.978903 0.835434 mance of the classifier is evaluated from the confusion
4 0.817083 0.787337 - 96.9291 matrix, specificity and accuracy by testing it with the fea-
5 0.307714 0.232455 - 8.23518 tures extracted from the feature set (Figs. 9, 10, and 11).

through 6 contain respectively the mean, variance, kurtosis

6 Conclusion and future work
and entropy. The seventh column contains the Target,
Texture feature extraction has found a major role in iden-
which specifies whether the block belongs to tumor regions
tifying the feature. In our proposed system we are using
or not. A ‘1’ in the Target means it belongs to the tumor
wrapper based genetic algorithm for random search tech-
region. Tables 6 and 7 gives the statistical comparison of
nique in identifying the best features and SVM as classifier.
FLAIR and T2 images in terms of specificity, accuracy and
The comparative analysis of the proposed system with
time elapsed respectively. Give the analysis of volumetric
other existing system such as FCM and EM and Levelset is
measurement in terms of automatic and absolute volume
carried out and the performance of the proposed method is
segmentation for the three methods EM ? Level set, FCM,
analyzed in terms of number of subset features selected,
SVM. The degree of similarity between the manual seg-
figure of merit, sensitivity, specificity, absolute volume
mentation and the machine segmented results, gives the
measurement error and the classification accuracy. From
similarity of the segmented results. Theoretical studies
the conducted experiments, it is evident that the proposed
prove that, the combination of EM and Level set algorithm
method outperforms other methods compared and produces
helps to detect the tumor boundaries more accurately.
better accuracy for the classifier which is adopted as the
Table 6 gives the analysis of figure of merit for the three
feature evaluation mechanism in the feature selection

Table 7 Volumetric analysis of manual and automatic segmentation for multimodality image
Image type Data Manual segmentation Automatic segmentation Absolute Volume measurement Figure of merit

FLAIR 1 22,301 27,007 21.102 0.82651

2 12,223 9232 - 24.47 0.799067
3 30,383 22,821 - 24.889 0.978903
4 9682 11,453 18.292 0.787337
5 10,630 3271 - 69.229 0.232455
T2 1 22,301 22,732 1.9326 0.61226
2 12,223 6437 - 47.337 0.939949
3 30,383 13,480 - 55.633 0.967449
4 9682 8282 - 14.46 0.653481
5 10,630 1425 - 86.595 0.477234

123
 Author's personal copy
Cluster Computing

Fig. 7 Output for FLAIR and

T2 images for the fuzzy C mean
method

Fig. 8 Comparison of automatic

and absolute segmentation

Data specificity(FLAIR) Data specificity(T2)

Data Accuracy(FLAIR Data Accuracy(T2)

Fig. 10 Statistical graph showing specificity and accuracy for T2 and

Fig. 9 Analysis chart showing Time elapsed for T2 and FLAIR
images
process. However experiment results show that employing
feature subset selection, surely enhances the classification
accuracy. Hence this proposed method is well suited for the
FLAIR
medical application where the classification algorithm is
predefined.
For future, image matrix transformations may be used
which could reduce the complexity and time. While an

123
 Author's personal copy
Cluster Computing
Fig. 11 a, b Analysis of manual and automatic segmentation for
FLAIR for EM – Level Set, FCM and SVM for FLAIR image. c,
d Analysis of manual and automatic segmentation for T2 for EM –
Level Set, FCM and SVM based technique for T2 image. e, i input
extraction of features which may include combinations of
multiple factor includes intensity, energy with contrast, etc.
References
1. Gonzalez, R.A., Woods, R.E.: Digital Image Processing, 2nd edn.
Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (2002)
2. Dubey, R.B., Hanmandlu, M., Vasikarla, S.: Evaluation of three
methods for mri brain tumor segmentation. In: 2011 Eighth
International Conference on Information Technology: New
Generations, IEEE (2011)
3. Zhang, Y., Brady, M., Smith, S.: Segmentation of brain MR
images through a hidden Markov random field model and the
expectation-maximization algorithm. In: Proceedings of the IEEE
transaction on Medical Images (2001)
4. Tolba, M.F., Mostafa, M.G., Gharib, T.F., Salem, M.A.: MR-
brain image segmentation using gaussian multi resolution anal-
ysis and the EM algorithm. ICEIS 2, 165–170 (2003)
images T2 and FLAIR. f, g, h Shows the output for EM and level set,
FCM and SVM for T2 input. j ,k, l Shows the output for EM and level
set, FCM and SVM for FLAIR input
5. Karnan, M., Logeswari, T.: An improved implementation of
braintumor detection using soft computing. Int. J. Comput. Netw.
Secur. 2(1), 6–10 (2010)
6. Kavitha, A.R., Chellamuthu, C.: Detection of brain tumour from
MRI image using modified region growing and neural network.
Imaging Sci. J. 61(7), 556–567 (2012)
7. Goldberg, D.E.: Genetic algorithms in search, optimization and
machine learning, 3rd edn, pp. 60–68. Addison Wesley Longman
Pvt. Ltd., Boston (2000)
8. Sieno, D.D.: Adding a Conscience to Competitive Learning. In:
Proceeding of IEEE the Second International Conference on
Neural networks (ICNN88), pp. 117–124 (1988)
9. Sieno, D.D: Adding a Conscience to Competitive Learning. In:
Proceeding of IEEE the Second International Conference on
Neural networks (ICNN88), pp. 117–124 (1988)
10. Goldberg, D.E.: Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization and
Machine Learning, 3rd edn, pp. 60–68. Addison Wesley Long-
man Pvt. Ltd., Boston (2000)
11. Jiang, L., Yang, W. (2003) A modified fuzzy C-means algorithm
for segmentation of magnetic resonance images. In: Proc. VIIth
Digital Image Computing: Techniques and Applications, Sydney
(2003)
123
 Author's personal copy
Cluster Computing

12. Farmer, M.E., Jain, A.K.: A wrapper-based approach toimage main area of interest in Medical Image processing and analysis, Bio
segmentation and classification. IEEE Trans. J. Mag. 14(12), Medical Engineering.
2060–2072 (2005)
13. Selvathi, D., Anitha, J.: Effective fuzzy clusteringalgorithm for G. Glan DevaDhas is presently
abnormal MR brain image segmentation. In: International/Ad- working as a Professor in the
vance Computing Conference (IACC2009), IEEE (2009) Department of Electronics and
14. Kaur, M., Banga, V.K.: Thresholding and level set based brain Instrumentation at Vimal Jyothi
tumor detection using bounding box as seed. Int. J. Eng. Res. Engineering College, Kannur,
Technol. 4, 2503–2507 (2013) Kerala, India. He has received
15. Wu, J., Ye, F., Ma, J.L., Sun, X.P., Xu, J., Cui, Z.M.: The seg- his B.E. degree in Instrumenta-
mentation and visualization of human organs based on adaptive tion and Control Engineering,
region growing method. In: IEEE 8th International Conference on M.E. degree in Process Control
Computer and Information Technology Workshops 978-0-7695- and Instrumentation and Ph.D.
3242-4/08, IEEE (2008) in Intelligent Controller Design
16. Eschrich, S., Ke, J., Hall, L.O.: Fast accurate fuzzy clustering during 1998, 2001, 2013
through data reduction. IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst. 11(2), 262–270 respectively. He is having more
(2003) than 15 years of experience in
17. Menze, B.H., Van Leemput, K., Lashkari, D., Weber, M.-A., teaching and research as Lec-
Ayache, N., Golland, P.: Segmenting glioma in multi-modal turer, Assist Professor, Associate Professor, HOD, Board of studies
images using a generative model for brain lesion segmentation. chairman, Academic council member, Research Supervisor, Doctoral
In: Proc. MICCAIBRATS, pp. 1–8 (2012) committee member and Professor in various Engineering Colleges
18. Zikic, D. et al.: Context-sensitive classification forests for seg- and Universities. He is the reviewer of many journals includes
mentation of brain tumor tissues. In: Proc. MICCAI-BRATS, International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering,
pp. 22–30 (2012) Journal of Water Process Engineering, Int. J. Of Modeling, Simula-
19. Bauer, S., et al.: Segmentation of brain tumor images based on tion and Scientific Comp, etc. He has published 30 articles in various
integrated hierarchical classification. In: MICCAI BraTS Work- indexed journals. His main area of interest are Soft computing,
shop. Nice: Miccai Society (2012) Intelligent controller Design, System Identification, Adaptive sys-
20. Aswathy, S.U., et al.: Quick detection of brain tumor using a tems, Smart Systems.
combination of EM and level set method. Indian J. Sci. Technol.
8(34), 74–82 (2015). https://doi.org/10.17485/ijst/2015/v8i34/ S. S. Kumar is presently working
85361 as associate professor and HOD
in the Department of Electronics
& Instrumentation at Noorul
S. U. Aswathy Computer Science Islam University, Thuckalay,
and Engineering Department, Tamil Nadu, India. He has
Noorul Islam University, Tamil received his B.E. Degree in
Nadu, India. I completed my Electronics and Instrumentation
M.Tech. (computer and Infor- Engineering, M.E. Degree in
mation Technology) From MS Applied Electronics and Ph.D.
University in 2009 and B.Tech. in Information and Communi-
(Electronics and Instrumenta- cation Engineering, Intelligent
tion) from Noorul Islam Controller Design during 2002,
University in 2005. Presently 2004, 2013 respectively. He is
Working as Associate professor having more than 13 years of
and HOD in charge in Muslim experience in teaching and research as Lecturer, Assist Professor,
Association college of Engi- Associate Professor, HOD. He is a reviewer in various International
neering, Trivandrum, Kerala. Journals and Published over 20 articles in various indexed journals.
She is having a total of His main area of interest is Medical Image Processing, Satellite Image
12.5 years of experience in teaching. She has published eight articles Processing, Control Sytsem etc.
in various International Journals and Scopus indexed journals. Her

123