Downloads · 30 days
0
dee0084/brain-tumor-deeplabv3plus
brain-tumor-deeplabv3plus is a machine learning model from dee0084. Use it for the machine learning task on the model card, and read the license before you ship it in a product. It is set up for pytorch. The card lists the license as cc-by-4.0.
An implementation of the architecture and training recipe described in Soomro et al., "Boosting Brain Tumor Detection Accuracy in MRI Using Transfer Learning and Fine-Tuned DeepLabv3+" (IEEE Open Journal of the Comput…
Downloads · 30 days
0
Access
Public
Updated Sep 6, 2026
Repo size
214 MB
Likes
0
Public
Click a slice to open those files.
.pt107 MB · 100%
From the Hugging Face model README
An implementation of the architecture and training recipe described in Soomro et al., "Boosting Brain Tumor Detection Accuracy in MRI Using Transfer Learning and Fine-Tuned DeepLabv3+" (IEEE Open Journal of the Computer Society, 2026), trained on the CE-MRI brain tumor dataset (Cheng et al., 233 patients, 3,064 T1-weighted contrast-enhanced axial slices: glioma, meningioma, pituitary tumors).
This is a personal/academic reproduction project — not the original authors' model, not clinically validated, and not for medical use. See Honest results below before using this for anything beyond learning/experimentation.
ReduceLROnPlateauFull training/evaluation code: [link to your GitHub repo here]
The paper reports ~98% DSC and ~99.3% sensitivity. This reproduction falls meaningfully short of that on the two metrics that matter most for segmentation quality (DSC, sensitivity), while matching closely on accuracy/specificity — which is expected, since ~98% of pixels in these images are background, so accuracy/specificity are dominated by the easy majority class rather than tumor-finding ability.
| Metric | This model (test set, 35 held-out patients) | Paper |
|---|---|---|
| DSC (overall) | 75.6% | 98.0% |
| Sensitivity | 88.95% | 99.3% |
| Specificity | 99.34% | 98.99% |
| Accuracy | 99.11% | 99.1% |
Per-tumor-type DSC: glioma 70.2%, meningioma 85.5%, pituitary 74.6% — the same relative ordering (meningioma easiest, glioma hardest) as the paper reports, which is a useful internal consistency check even though absolute numbers differ.
Why the gap likely exists (in rough order of suspected impact):
This gap is reported transparently rather than hidden — reproducing a paper's exact numbers without the authors' full implementation details is a known hard problem in ML research, and getting a rigorous, honest measurement of how far off a reproduction is is itself the useful skill being demonstrated here.
import torch
from model import DeepLabV3Plus # from this repo's model.py
model = DeepLabV3Plus(num_classes=1, use_imagenet_init=False)
state = torch.load("pytorch_model.pt", map_location="cpu", weights_only=False)
model.load_state_dict(state)
model.eval()
# image: torch.Tensor, shape (1, 3, 512, 512), ImageNet-normalized
with torch.no_grad():
logits = model(image)
mask = (torch.sigmoid(logits) > 0.5).float()
See the GitHub repo for the full dataset.py preprocessing pipeline
(CLAHE + ImageNet normalization) needed to prepare inputs correctly.
Trained on the CE-MRI brain tumor dataset (Cheng et al., 2017, "Enhanced performance of brain tumor classification via tumor region augmentation and partition," PLoS ONE). This repository does not redistribute the dataset — see the original publication for access.
If referencing the original paper this reproduces:
Soomro et al., "Boosting Brain Tumor Detection Accuracy in MRI Using
Transfer Learning and Fine-Tuned DeepLabv3+," IEEE Open Journal of the
Computer Society, vol. 7, 2026.
This repository is an independent reproduction and is not affiliated with the original authors.