Spatial Modeling and Classification of Corneal Shape

One of the most promising applications of data mining is in biomedical data used in patient diagnosis. Any method of data analysis intended to support the clinical decision-making process should meet several criteria: it should capture clinically relevant features, be computationally feasible, and provide easily interpretable results. In an initial study, we examined the feasibility of using Zernike polynomials to represent biomedical instrument data in conjunction with a decision tree classifier to distinguish between the diseased and non-diseased eyes. Here, we provide a comprehensive follow-up to that work, examining a second representation, pseudo-Zernike polynomials, to determine whether they provide any increase in classification accuracy. We compare the fidelity of both methods using residual root-mean-square (rms) error and evaluate accuracy using several classifiers: neural networks, C4.5 decision trees, Voting Feature Intervals, and Nainodotumlve Bayes. We also examine the effect of several meta-learning strategies: boosting, bagging, and Random Forests (RFs). We present results comparing accuracy as it relates to dataset and transformation resolution over a larger, more challenging, multi-class dataset. They show that classification accuracy is similar for both data transformations, but differs by classifier. We find that the Zernike polynomials provide better feature representation than the pseudo-Zernikes and that the decision trees yield the best balance of classification accuracy and interpretability

[1]  Heekuck Oh,et al.  Neural Networks for Pattern Recognition , 1993, Adv. Comput..

[2]  J. M. Miller,et al.  Representation of videokeratoscopic height data with Zernike polynomials. , 1995, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[3]  S D Klyce,et al.  Screening of prior refractive surgery by a wavelet‐based neural network , 2001, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[4]  Ian H. Witten,et al.  Data mining: practical machine learning tools and techniques with Java implementations , 2002, SGMD.

[5]  N Maeda,et al.  Automated keratoconus screening with corneal topography analysis. , 1994, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[6]  Leo Breiman,et al.  Random Forests , 2001, Machine Learning.

[7]  N Maeda,et al.  Neural network classification of corneal topography. Preliminary demonstration. , 1995, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[8]  L. Thibos,et al.  Standards for reporting the optical aberrations of eyes. , 2002, Journal of refractive surgery.

[9]  John W. Auer,et al.  Linear algebra with applications , 1996 .

[10]  Srinivasan Parthasarathy,et al.  A Model-Based Approach to Visualizing Classification Decisions for Patient Diagnosis , 2005, AIME.

[11]  Robert B. Mandell,et al.  A guide to videokeratography , 1996 .

[12]  Yoav Freund,et al.  Experiments with a New Boosting Algorithm , 1996, ICML.

[13]  D. R. Iskander,et al.  Optimal modeling of corneal surfaces with Zernike polynomials , 2001, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[14]  Roland T. Chin,et al.  On image analysis by the methods of moments , 1988, Proceedings CVPR '88: The Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[15]  J. Y. Wang,et al.  Wave-front interpretation with Zernike polynomials. , 1980, Applied optics.

[16]  S. Parthasarathy,et al.  Automated Classification of Keratoconus : A Case Study in Analyzing Clinical Data , 2022 .

[17]  Alberto Maria Segre,et al.  Programs for Machine Learning , 1994 .

[18]  Y. Rabinowitz,et al.  KISA% index: a quantitative videokeratography algorithm embodying minimal topographic criteria for diagnosing keratoconus. , 1999, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[19]  P. Kiely,et al.  The Mean Shape of the Human Cornea , 1982 .

[20]  von F. Zernike Beugungstheorie des schneidenver-fahrens und seiner verbesserten form, der phasenkontrastmethode , 1934 .

[21]  Chris Varekamp,et al.  Observation of tropical rain forest trees by airborne high-resolution interferometric radar , 2000, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote. Sens..

[22]  H. Altay Güvenir,et al.  Classification by Voting Feature Intervals , 1997, ECML.

[23]  Mark R. Morelande,et al.  Modeling of corneal surfaces with radial polynomials , 2002, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[24]  Max Born,et al.  Principles of optics - electromagnetic theory of propagation, interference and diffraction of light (7. ed.) , 1999 .

[25]  Ron Kohavi,et al.  A Study of Cross-Validation and Bootstrap for Accuracy Estimation and Model Selection , 1995, IJCAI.

[26]  J. Ross Quinlan,et al.  Induction of Decision Trees , 1986, Machine Learning.

[27]  Srinivasan Parthasarathy,et al.  Classification of biomedical data through model-based spatial averaging , 2005, Fifth IEEE Symposium on Bioinformatics and Bioengineering (BIBE'05).

[28]  Srinivasan Parthasarathy,et al.  Alternate representation of distance matrices for characterization of protein structure , 2005, Fifth IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM'05).

[29]  Leo Breiman,et al.  Bagging Predictors , 1996, Machine Learning.

[30]  D. Robert Iskander,et al.  Corneal surface characterization : how many Zernike terms should be used? , 2001 .

[31]  Pat Langley,et al.  Estimating Continuous Distributions in Bayesian Classifiers , 1995, UAI.