International Journal of Multimedia Information Retrieval (2020) 9:271–290

https://doi.org/10.1007/s13735-020-00199-7

TRENDS AND SURVEYS

A study of classification and feature extraction techniques for brain

tumor detection
Vatika Jalali1 · Dapinder Kaur1

Received: 28 July 2020 / Revised: 10 October 2020 / Accepted: 16 October 2020 / Published online: 12 November 2020
© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2020

Abstract
Medical imaging aids in the analysis of interior parts of the human body such as the functioning of the organs or tissues for
early treatment of diseases. Many different types of medical imaging technologies exist, for example, X-ray radiography,
magnetic resonance imaging, endoscopy, positron emission tomography, CT scan (computed tomography), and many more. A
tumor is an abnormal tissue in the brain which causes damage to the functioning of the cell. Therefore, brain tumor detection
is an incredibly tricky task. Manual detection of a tumor is quite risky as it involves the insertion of a needle in the brain.
Thus, there is a need for automated brain tumor detection systems. The well-timed detection of the tumor can add to accurate
treatment and can increase the survival rate of patients. From machine learning techniques, namely K-nearest neighbor,
support vector machine, and more to soft computing techniques, namely artificial neural network, self-organizing map, and
others hold a significant stand in detection and categorization of brain tumor. Various methods including deep learning-based
classifiers such as convolutional neural network, recurrent neural network, deep belief network (DBN), and others are used to
make it easier to detect the tumor. Hybrid classifiers were also used for classification systems such as combining the machine
learning approach with soft computing. This study is to summarize and compare the work of various authors on automatic
brain tumor detection using medical imaging. Based on the accuracy, specificity, and sensitivity parameters, the results of
different techniques are analyzed and compared graphically.

Keywords Tumor · MRI · Feature extraction · Classifier

1 Introduction duces the required output. A range of algorithms is used

Digital image processing is one of the emerging techniques
that have been explicitly used for past decades. It is a method
to process a digital image through an algorithm to enhance
the image to extract useful information. A digital image is a
two-dimensional representation of a real image. It consists
of a finite number of pixels. Various noise removing filters
and contrast enhancement algorithms are used to improve
the quality of the image. Enhanced image delivers the skill-
ful information for further processing [1]. The input to the
computer-aided system is the digital image which is further
processed by using a large number of algorithms and pro-
B Vatika Jalali
vatikajalali23@gmail.com
Dapinder Kaur
dapinder.coecse@cgc.edu.in
1 Computer Science, Chandigarh Engineering College,
Landran, Punjab, India
for performing various operations such as image sharpening,
zooming, blurring, noise removal, edge detection, and many
more [2]. The output of these computer systems provides use-
ful information about the image. It is used in many different
fields as it provides clear images. It brings into play has been
amplified exponentially in the past few years [3]. It became
a core area of research in computer science and engineer-
ing. It has various applications extending from biomedical
imaging, face detection, signature recognition, and biomet-
ric verification to remote sensing. The primary goal of image
processing is to remove human labor. Image processing con-
sists of essential steps which are explained below, and Fig. 1
shows the steps of digital image processing.
Step 1: Image acquisition
It is the foremost step in digital image processing. This
step involves collecting MRI images (digital image) from
the relevant sources and further performing pre-processing
operations on it [5]. Pre-processing involves operations like
grayscale conversions, scaling, etc.

123
272
Fig. 1 Digital image processing steps [4]
Step 2: Image enhancement
Image enhancement is an important step in digital image
processing. The main concept behind the image enhancement
is to highlight the areas of interest in an image [5]. This is
done to bring out the hidden details of the image. The basic
operation performed under this section is the adjustment of
brightness and contrast.
Step 3: Image restoration
Unlike image enhancement, the image restoration step is
based on the upgrading the look of an image [5]. Its main
objective is to remove noise and to regain a resolution that
was lost in an image.
Step 4: Color image processing
Color image processing increases its importance in many
fields due to the use of the digital image [5]. Various color
models are performed to obtain color features of the image.
Step 5: Wavelets and multi-resolution processing
Images are represented in different degrees of resolution by
using wavelets [5]. Its objective is to signify the scale of
features. One of the major applications is image compression.
Step 6: Compression
This step includes techniques that deal with reducing the size
of images to store it and bandwidth [5]. At this instant, it is
very useful on the internet to compress various amounts of
data to transfer it or communicate it with others [6].
Step 7: Morphological processing
123
International Journal of Multimedia Information Retrieval (2020) 9:271–290
It performs the morphological operations on the image to dig
out the components of the image [5].
Step 8: Segmentation
Segmentation is a crucial step in digital image processing.
Segmentation refers to divide the image into several parts
[5]. As per the interest, the segmented part of the digital
image is selected.
Step 9: Representation and description
Representation and description is based on the segmented
image for representing the required region such as boundary
representation or region representation [7]. Sometimes the
focus is on the interior parts, and the other times, the focus
is on the exterior parts of a segmented image [5].
Step 10: Object recognition
The object in object recognition differs for different processes
just like in, the vehicle in vehicle detection, tumor in tumor
detection, quality in quality detection, the disease in disease
detection, and other processes [5].
Step 11: Knowledge base
One of the difficult steps in digital image processing is the
knowledge base [5]. The knowledge can be fine points of
regions of the image where certain information of the image
is stored [8].
Image processing is a key aspect of the research work. The
functioning of image processing varies for different fields.
In the direction to resolve the real problems in engineering
International Journal of Multimedia Information Retrieval (2020) 9:271–290
automation and robotics, image processing comes into res-
cue. Rim detection and dimensional verification in automatic
wheel images are the application of digital image process-
ing in the field of automation and robotics [9]. Environment
and geographical conditions are analyzed by satellite image
processing which helps to detect forthcoming disasters and
changes brought on the earth’s surface [10]. Just like the
India Meteorological Department (IMD) issued a warning
about the cyclone amphan in West Bengal, which helped
to evacuate people in time [11]. Defense and security dis-
cipline widely used image processing for missile guidance,
target detection, and vehicle navigation [12]. Pattern recogni-
tion is the other application of image processing. It includes
text detection, handwriting recognition, and data analysis.
Some other applications of digital image processing are space
image processing, remote sensing, biological image process-
ing, and automatic character recognition [9].
Biomedical imaging is one of the prominent trends of
digital image processing. Biomedical imaging is advancing
scientifically. Over the last few decades, its application has
been increased. Biomedical imaging is acquiring its achieve-
ments in basic research to the clinical uses [13]. It is a
technique to analyze the human body at a granular level by
visualization. It involves acquiring data, processing it, and
extracting useful information, which eventually helps in fur-
ther diagnosis of diseases such as brain tumors, breast cancer,
lung cancer, skin cancer, etc. There are various techniques
for biomedical imaging like CT scan, MRI scan, positron
emission tomography (PET), X-rays, endoscopy, and many
more [14]. These techniques are used to analyze, improve,
and display images. These medical images are interpreted
by the specified experts that are radiologist so that decision
making can be increased. The major hindrances that occur in
biomedical imaging are as follows [15]:
1. Heterogeneity of images Biomedical imaging has a great
advantage in medical science for representing internal
parts of the human body at a granular level. This helps
to depict the organs, blood flow, cells, and living tis-
sues of the human body. But sometimes, these medical
images differ dramatically even if captured with the
same technique for the same patient as well as differ-
ent patients [15]. Biological systems are susceptible to
inter-and intra-individual changeability.
2. Unspecified depiction of objects Medical images not only
show the organs of the human body but with the back-
ground. Medical images do not separate the interesting
part from the background [15]. Thus, the segmentation of
the interesting region in the entire medical image is con-
sidered to be the most complicated task in biomedical
imaging.
3. Robustness of algorithm Due to the complication in iden-
tifying the interesting region from the whole medical
273
image, there comes the use of high-level programming
that is image processing algorithms [15]. Thus, this algo-
rithm provides clarity in medical images and helps to
segment the choice of interest from the entire medical
image.
Outstanding advancement in medical science and com-
puter engineering, there exist different modalities of medical
imaging. Each technique has its pros and cons. The below
Table 1 shows images of different medical imaging tech-
niques along with its advantages, disadvantages, and its uses.
According to the national brain tumor society, an estimate
of 700,000 people will suffer from a primary brain tumor in
the USA and around 87,000 more people will be diagnosed
in 2020. About 69.8% will be benign tumors and 30.2% will
be malignant tumors.
Only 36% will be the average survival rate of malignant
tumor patients [16]. The worldwide medical imaging indus-
try in 2015 amounted to $30.05 billion and is anticipated
$40.56 billion will be achieved in 2021. From 2016 to 2021,
it is expected to increase by 5.1% [1]. Figure 2 shows the
graph that depicts the number of new cancer cases expected
to increase. It indicates that from 2010 to 2020, the expected
number of new cases will increase from 1.5 million per year
to 1.9 million per year [17].
1.1 Brain tumor
A brain tumor is a collection or mass of abnormal cells within
the brain. Brain tumors may be cancerous (malignant) or
non-cancerous (benign). When benign or malignant tumors
develop, they can boost the stress inside your skull [19]. This
can trigger brain damage, and it may be life-threatening.
As a result of brain tumors, the numbers of people who
will die in developed countries has increased by 300% as
stated by the National Brain Tumor Foundation (NBTF) [20].
There are about 150 different brain tumors that have been
recorded. World Health Organization (WHO) categorized
tumors on the basis of their microscopic characteristics as
a primary brain tumors and secondary brain tumor. Primary
brain tumors are mostly originated in the brain, whereas Sec-
ondary brain tumors are caused by the tumor present in other
parts of the body. Following Table 2 shows the categorization
of brain tumor and its description.
A Benign tumor is the abnormal division of cells in the
brain that do not have the property of invading other tis-
sues of the brain or surrounding body parts of the body and
usually grow slowly. These are non-cancerous tumors. It is
less life-threatening and can be removed easily. There are
no such accurate causes, but family history, diet, chemical
exposure, and stress may be a threat [21]. Meningioma, pitu-
itary adenomas, and hemangioblastomas are most commonly
diagnosed with benign tumors. Malignant tumors are the can-
123
274 International Journal of Multimedia Information Retrieval (2020) 9:271–290

Table 1 Different modalities of medical imaging

Medical imaging modalities Advantages Disadvantages

1. CT scan It is known as computed tomography Harmful exposure to ionization radiations

It is rapid and painless Poor resolution
It provides detailed information on bone-like
structures
It can also classify lesions
Uses
Detection of tumors and vascular diseases, and
examining of chest, abdomen, and pelvis

2. PET It is known as positron emission tomography It is expensive to use

It visualizes the functioning of organs and soft Radiations are harmful to pregnant women
tissues
It provides higher resolution images
Uses
It can be used in areas like pharmacology,
neurology, neuropsychology, and others

3. X rays X-rays are the cheapest imaging modality
It is a mostly used and convenient technique
Uses
It can be in areas of medicine and
pharmacology. It is used to detect any injuries
in bones, examining organs, and soft tissues
It provides a lack of information
The higher the exposure, the higher is the
chances of skin cancer
It uses causes a change in DNA

4. MRI It is known as magnetic resonance imaging It is highly not recommended for people who
It does not produce any ionization radiations are claustrophobic
It provides better resolution in medical images A lot of noise is produced by its use
Uses
It is used to detect tumors, injuries, cysts,
infections, and hemorrhage

2
Million Cancer Cases

1.5

0.5

0
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
New Cancer Cases 1.57 1.6 1.62 1.65 1.68 1.7 1.75 1.8 1.83 1.87 1.9

Fig. 2 Estimated number of new cases [18]

123
International Journal of Multimedia Information Retrieval (2020) 9:271–290
Table 2 Brain tumor types
Types of brain tumor Definition
1. Primary brain tumor They arise within the brain and are mainly
from glial cells known as gliomas. They are
further categorized as benign or malignant
2. Secondary brain tumor These are caused due to tumors present in
other parts of the body such as lung cancer,
breast cancer, and more. Tumor cells float
from other parts through the blood and
reach the brain to cause a brain tumor
cerous cells that have the property of invading other tissues
and other body parts. Blood is the only way through which
contaminated cells float to other areas. Its growth is rapid and
can certainly grow back when removed. It is life-threatening
[22]. A common example is lung cancer that may spread to
the breast, liver, bones, or brain.
The biopsy of the brain for the detection of tumors is the
manual method. A biopsy is a method to examine a removed
abnormal cell from the brain under a microscope. The exam-
ination will show the results that are whether the brain cell
is normal or tumor. It involves high risk, bleeding in the
brain, swelling in the brain, infections, clotting, and many
more [23]. Thus, to overcome these mentioned drawbacks
medical imaging is used. Medical imaging is a technique
used for creating visual representations of the human body
for the clinical examination. It helps to analyze the working
and functioning of various parts of the body as well as the tis-
sues. It also helps to detect a problem at the early stage which
indeed helps for diagnosis of the problem. It overcomes the
drawback of the manual method [24]. Magnetic resonance
imaging (MRI) is a technique that uses radio waves, magnets,
and computers to deliver detailed information on the human
body. It is used to diagnose tumors as well as injuries [6]. It
enables doctors to get information about the human body at
a granular level. MRI scan is one of the best imaging tests
used to get exquisite details of the brain and other parts of
the body. It can visualize the organ into three planes, namely
axial, sagittal, and coronal as shown in Fig. 3 [6].
275
Medical image Example
Gliomas, astrocytoma, glioblastoma
multiforme, meningiomas, pituitary
adenomas
Metastatic cancer
1.2 Automatic brain tumor detection system
Detection of tumors in the brain is a key step for the
tumor diagnosis. Automatic brain tumor detection system
is a programmed system that uses various machine learning
algorithms and deep learning algorithms to identify tumors
in the brain and further classify tumors. The programmed
system consists of a variety of filtering algorithms, segmen-
tation algorithms, feature extraction, selection algorithms,
and tumor classification algorithms [25]. It overcomes the
limitations of manual detection of the tumor. It helps to spot
tumors in the brain at a premature stage which indeed helps
in early dealing with diseases. Figure 4 illustrates the basic
process of the automated brain tumor detection system.
The basic process of the programmed brain tumor detec-
tion system consists of a six-step procedure. Each step has its
significant importance in the discovery and categorization of
brain tumors. Image segmentation and tumor detection are
the two major steps for tumor recognition. The functioning
of every step in the process is explained in a further section.
• Image acquisition
Image acquisition means a collection of data for extracting
helpful information. The researcher can select any imaging
method as per preference. A mainly MRI scan is used by
the researchers due to its immense benefits. Images can be
acquired from the online dataset sources like Medical Image
Repository, Kaggle, Figshare, and many more. Hospitals are
the secondary source to obtain datasets [26]. All the dataset
contains the information regarding the medical images it con-
123
276
Fig. 3 MRI imaging planes
Fig. 4 Steps for automatic brain tumor detection system
tains, namely image format, image size, number of images,
and type of tumor.
• Pre-processing
Preprocessing consists of noise removal and contrast
enhancement. Medical images incorporate noises due to sig-
nals. There are different types of noise that can be present
in a medical image, namely salt and pepper, Gaussian noise,
impulse noise, and more. Each noise has a different impact on
medical images. Therefore, to eliminate these different noises
from the image by various noises removal filters are used.
Median filter, Wiener filter, Mean filter, and so on, filters exist
to remove noise [25]. Images obtained after noise reduction
are more accurate to provide essential information. Later than
comes the contrast enhancement, which is used to increase
the contrast of the low-intensity region to the high-intensity
region. There are various contrast enhancement techniques
such as bi-histogram equalization, histogram equalization,
and even optimization is used. Thus, it helps to get clarity in
the medical image.
• Image segmentation
123
International Journal of Multimedia Information Retrieval (2020) 9:271–290
Image segmentation means dividing an image into several
parts on basis of similarities or dissimilarities properties.
This is done to extract the useful segment from the medi-
cal image. In the case of a brain tumor, it segments the tumor
part. Thus, it is an extremely tricky step [25]. The threshold
method, the edge-based method, the region-based method,
and the clustering-based method are some of the segmenta-
tion techniques.
• Feature extraction and selection
The output image of the segmentation step undergoes the
feature extraction step. Every image has its significant fea-
tures which are helpful for tumor detection and classification.
Thus, the researcher needs to extract those essential features.
A range of feature extraction techniques exists such as gray
level co-occurrence matrix (GLCM), histogram of gradient
(HOG), local binary pattern (LBP), speeded up robust fea-
tures (SURF), and more [25]. Feature extraction techniques
are classified into three basic categories as shown in Fig. 5.
Sometimes, author uses hybrid features for the extraction,
which indeed makes the training process complicated. There-
fore, feature selection comes into role. The feature selection
International Journal of Multimedia Information Retrieval (2020) 9:271–290
Fig. 5 Feature extraction techniques
process selects only the essential features for tumor detection.
It keeps the vital features and eliminates unneeded fea-
tures [25]. A variety of feature selection methods is present
for example principal component analysis (PCA), particle
swarm optimization (PSO), Wrapper method, and so on.
• Image classification
Then, feature selection is followed by classification which
refers to classify a medical image into a normal or abnormal
image. It is also used to categorize the tumor type [25]. A lot
of techniques have been identified for example support vec-
tor machine (SVM), KKNN, convolutional neural network
(CNN), and many more. Image classification techniques are
based on different types of approaches as shown in below
Fig. 6.
• Tumor detection
At last, comes the output image that depicts whether the
patient suffers from a tumor or not. It further provides infor-
mation regarding tumor mainly type of tumor and tumor size
[25]. Thereafter, doctors provide the proper medication to
patients which would indeed help in lower the risk of the
life of the patients. Thus, automated brain tumor detection
system plays a vital role to help outpatients by diagnosing at
an early stage.
2 Related work
The need for an automatic brain tumor detection system has
increased as the people suffering from it have increased. Till
to date, researchers have worked a lot on programmable brain
277
tumor detection systems and achieved appropriate results
[27]. Some of the researchers had worked on the detection
of a tumor that is whether a patient suffers from a tumor or
not. Other authors had worked on the classification of brain
tumors. Authors had used different technologies for tumor
detection and classification.
2.1 Techniques used for brain tumor detection
A classifier is a broadly used technique for the detection of
a brain tumor. A classifier is an algorithm that is used to
allocate class labels to unlabeled data. One of the popular
examples of the classifier is the classification of emails into
a spam or non-spam. Just like the above example, a classifier
is also used for classifying brain MRI images into normal,
abnormal, and further its tumor type. Different types of clas-
sifiers exist on the basis of different approaches like machine
learning, deep learning, hybrid, and many more. The use
of different approaches leads to different outcomes on the
basis of input factors. The accuracy of any automated sys-
tems directly depends on the accuracy of the classifier for
classification. Thus, the correct use of classifiers plays a crit-
ical role in any automated system.
2.1.1 Machine learning-based detection
In the medical field, machine learning is one of the dom-
inant tools used for solving a range of complex problems
with the aim of extremely high accuracy and specificity.
It has gained immense attention in recent years. Machine
learning-based classifiers are widely used in programmed
brain tumor detection system. The success of this system
depends on how efficient the classification algorithm works
123
278
Fig. 6 Classification techniques
Fig. 7 Classification techniques based on machine learning
which is to classify new medical images of abnormality and
normality. Many researchers have worked on this classifica-
tion algorithm boosting techniques to increase the accuracy
even higher. SVM, K-nearest neighbor (KNN), decision tree,
naïve Bayes, and others are some of the machine learning-
based classifiers used for classifying brain tumor type as
shown in below Fig. 7.
Anjali et al. [28] proposed a system to diagnose the brain
tumor from MRI Scan. They used a median filter for noise
removal. Further, texture feature was used to extract features,
and then, important features were selected by using PSO.
A combination of CART classification and ensemble SVM-
based classification was used for classifying benign and
malignant tumors. The proposed system achieved 92.31%
accuracy. Another author Chander et al. [29] proposed an
improved system for tumor detection and classification. Seg-
mentation was performed by adaptive k-means clustering
followed by morphological operations, and further features
123
International Journal of Multimedia Information Retrieval (2020) 9:271–290
were extracted through GLCM. The proposed system imple-
ments an SVM classifier for classifying benign and malignant
tumors. 99.7% of segmentation accuracy and 93% of clas-
sification accuracy were achieved by the proposed system.
Rajan et al. [30] proposed K-means clustering integrated
with fuzzy c-means along with active contour by level set
for image segmentation. SVM was used as a classifier. The
proposed system provides better segmentation. Vallabha-
neni et al. [31] proposed a novel technique for automatic
brain tumor detection. Edge adaptive total variation denois-
ing technique was used for removing noise from the MRI
images. Mean shift clustering was used for image segmenta-
tion. GLCM was used for feature extraction techniques. At
last, multi-class SVM was used for the classification of MRI
images. Devkota et al. [32] proposed a computer-aided sys-
tem for brain tumor detection. A median filter was used for
noise removal, mathematical morphological operations were
used for image segmentation, statistical and texture features
International Journal of Multimedia Information Retrieval (2020) 9:271–290
were extracted from segmented images, and at last SVM
was used for image classification. Machine learning-based
classifier was used classifying MRI images into benign and
malignant.
Kumar et al. [33] used a machine learning approach for
brain tumor detection. The proposed system uses PSO (par-
ticle swarm optimization) for the feature selection and SVM
(support vector machine) for the classification of the type of
tumor. A hybrid model POS-SVM was used to select min-
imum features that are important for tumor detection. As a
consequence, less number of features results in higher accu-
racy, efficiency in classification, and consumes less time. In
this paper, the accuracy of the POS-SVM model was 95.23%
in comparison with the simple SVM model was 86.82%.
In the proposed system, the specificity and sensitivity of
the POS-SVM model were 94.8% and 100%, respectively,
whereas another author Song et al. [34] proposed a system
that uses machine learning-based methods for the detection of
gliomas. Firstly, preprocessing was performed that includes
noise removal and image standardization. Then, dynamic his-
togram equalization is used to enhance low contrast standard
images. The proposed system uses PSO-KSVM for the detec-
tion of the tumor. PSO-KSVM was used to train the classifier.
The accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the proposed
model were 98.36%, 99.17%, and 97.83%, respectively.
Kaplan et al. [35] used modified local binary patterns
(nLBP and aLBP) for feature extraction followed by clas-
sification of brain tumor types namely glioma, meningioma,
and pituitary. Different classification techniques were imple-
mented such as KNN, artificial neural network (ANN),
random forest, averaged one dependence estimators, and
linear discriminant analysis, and was noted that KNN pro-
duced the highest accuracy that is 95.56% with nLBP (d 
1). The importance of image segmentation and detection in
brain tumor detection is to differentiate between different
regions of the brain. Abbasi et al. [36] proposed an auto-
mated detection system for a brain tumor in 3D MRI images.
Firstly, preprocessing is performed by bias field correlation
and histogram matching to improve the contrast in 3d MRI
images. Then, the interesting region is segmented by using
Otsu thresholding. Features are extracted from the segmented
regions by using LBP and HOG. At last, a random forest
classifier is used for classification. The proposed method-
ology was performed on BRATS 2013 dataset. Amin et al.
[37] presented methodology based on machine learning for
brain tumor detection. The proposed framework consists of
Weiner filter for noise removal from MRI images, potential
field clustering for MRI image segmentation, LBP and GWT
for feature extraction, and different classifier is used for clas-
sifying tumor and non-tumor MRI images. The proposed
framework was implemented on local, BRATS 2013, and
BRATS 2015 dataset. 90%, 93%, and 97% of accuracy were
279
attained by local, BRATS 2013, and BRATS 2015 dataset,
respectively.
2.1.2 Detection using deep learning
One of the functions of artificial intelligence is deep learning.
It is inspired by the working of the human brain. Thus, it tries
to mimic the human brain to process the data for identifying
objects and patterns, making decisions, recognizing speech,
and translating language. Deep learning is also referred to
as a subset of machine learning. It is sometimes known as a
deep neural network. It works without being supervised by
the human that is it learns from the data that is fed to it (both
unstructured and unlabeled) [38]. It is various applications
in real life. One of the most popular uses is in the medi-
cal field to detect abnormalities in the human body. A deep
learning classifier is used to predict the abnormalities in the
medical image with the least possible error. Previously, var-
ious authors did adapt a deep learning classifier in the work
to achieve the highest accuracy. Figure 8 shows a classifier
based on the deep learning approach.
Mehekare et al. [25] proposed a novel CNN-based tech-
nique for brain tumor division in MRI images. This paper
was able to successfully implement a CNN-based approach
to segment tumors from MRI scans. In this paper, a glioma
tumor was detected. Glioma is a wide category of tumors
in the brain and spinal cord that originate from glial cells,
brain cells that can evolve into tumors. Glioma leads to a
very short lifespan. In previous segmentation techniques, the
algorithm accuracy is less. It used an automatic method of
segmentation based on convolutional neural networks (CNN)
to overcome the above drawbacks. The performance was
evaluated using a confusion matrix. The accuracy of CNN
was 86%, the misclassification rate was 14%, precision was
61%, and sensitivity was 94%.
Another researcher Afshar et al. [39] proposed a capsule
network (Caps Net) architecture that includes both brain MRI
images and tumor course boundaries to identify tumors. The
proposed Caps Net architecture has mainly two advantages.
Firstly, there is no need for accurate notation of tumors. Sec-
ondly, it helps us to focus on the main area and establish its
relationship with the surrounding tissues. Caps Net was used
to overcome the CNN shortcomings. CNN could not focus
on the main area of the tumor as well as it could not consider
its relationship with the surrounding tissues as it is a critical
indicator of tumor type. The proposed system is capable of
enhancing the precision of classification accuracy to prior
Caps Nets and CNNs. Caps Nets have certain properties that
increase interpretability, i.e., parameters can explain whether
or not the network has captured correct features. Maharjan
et al. [40] intended to increase the multi-class classification
accuracy and reduce the problem of overfitting problems. It
proposed a methodology that consists of enhanced softmax
123
280
Fig. 8 Classification techniques
based on deep learning
loss function and CNN. It attained an accuracy of 98.9% and
322.56 ms processing time. Das et al. [41] proposed two steps
for the brain tumor detection system. Firstly, preprocessing
was done by resizing, filtering, and contrast enhancement.
Secondly, classification was done by CNN. The proposed
system was implemented on3064 MRI images that consist
of three different types of tumors. 94.39% of accuracy was
achieved.
Image segmentation and classification tasks are two major
steps in brain tumor detection and classification. Kumar [42]
proposed an optimized deep learning technique for clas-
sification. The fuzzy deformable fusion model along with
dolphin-SCA (dolphin echolocation-based sine cosine algo-
rithm) technique was used for image segmentation. Further
features were extracted from LDP, and then, extracted fea-
tures were used for classification by deep CNN. The proposed
system was performed on MRI images that were obtained
from the BRATS database and the SimBRATS database.
96.3% of accuracy was achieved by the proposed system.
Ghahfarrokhi et al. [43] proposed a computer-aided diag-
nosis system for classifying brain tumors into benign and
malignant. FCM was used for image segmentation tasks, and
GLCM was used for extracting features. Theses extracted
features were used by three different classifiers, i.e., SVM,
KNN, and Pattern Net, and further the results of theses
classifiers were compared by accuracy parameter. 98.9% of
accuracy was the highest accuracy achieved by the Pattern
Net.
Saba et al. [44] proposed a framework that consists of the
Grab Cut method for image segmentation, and the transfer
learning model visual geometry group (VGG-19) is used for
extracting essential features. A single feature vector is created
of an optimized feature that is fused with the help of the
serial fusion approach. Later classification is performed by
various classifiers. This methodology is applied to BRATS
2015, BRATS 2016, and BRATS 2017 datasets. Here, deep
learning was used to extract deep features for the accurate
detection of a brain tumor.
Deep learning is not only used for classification tasks but
also for image segmentation tasks. U-Net is a well-known
technique for deep learning. Garg et al. [45] proposed a novel
technique that is U-Net-based deep learning. Here, U-Net-
based CNN for segmenting tumor region from the whole MRI
123
International Journal of Multimedia Information Retrieval (2020) 9:271–290
image. This technique was implemented on BRAST’17 orga-
nized by MICCAI that consisted of 210 high-grade glioma
(HGG) and 75 low-grade glioma (LGG) MRI images. The
proposed technique helps to learn about the shapes of the
tumor region along with its characteristics which indeed
helps o segment out the tumor part from the rest of the MRI
image. This novel technique overcomes the drawback of the
traditional methods used for brain tumor detection. The pro-
posed system is efficient and provides accurate results. Amin
et al. [46] also proposed a detection system that employed
deep CNN for tumor segmentation. The proposed method
was implemented on all the BRATS datasets. Zhang et al.
[47] proposed a framework that improved the performance
of image segmentation. It presented a deep feature learn-
ing framework to segment out the tumor region from MRI
images. This framework consists of two learning processes,
i.e., cross-modality feature translation process (CMFT) and
cross-modality feature fusion process (CMFF). Dong et al.
[48] proposed a fully automated system for brain tumor
segmentation. U-Net-based CNN was used for image seg-
mentation. The proposed methodology was implemented on
BRATS 2015 dataset. It showed that the proposed method
provides promising results. Naser et al. [49] presented the
potential of using deep learning and transfer learning mod-
els for brain tumor detection grading of lower grade glioma
tumor. The proposed methodology was implemented on MRI
images obtained from 110 patients that are available at The
Cancer Imaging Archive (TCIA). CNN based on U-Net
architecture was used for image segmentation. It achieved
92% accuracy.
Apart from image segmentation and classification, fea-
ture extraction is also done by the deep learning techniques.
Özyurt et al. [50] proposed a novel detection system for clas-
sifying MRI images into benign and malignant. Firstly, image
segmentation was done by the use of neutrosophic set–ex-
pert maximum fuzzy sure entropy (NS-EMFSE). Then, deep
learning technique CNN was used to extract the features from
the segmented MRI images. Later, these features were used
to classify MRI images into benign and malignant tumor
by using different classifiers such as SVM and KNN. The
performance of these two classifiers was compared and ana-
lyzed. SVM classifier with CNN extracted features yielded
the highest accuracy, i.e., 95.62%. Praveen et al. [51] pro-
International Journal of Multimedia Information Retrieval (2020) 9:271–290
posed a methodology based on ANN and fuzzy c-means.
Image segmentation was done to point out the area of the
tumor through fuzzy c-means. Further, important features
were extracted from segmented MRI images by GLRLM
technique. At last, ANN was used to classify MRI images. It
was performed on 120 MRI images. The proposed method-
ology provides 87.50% of accuracy. Selvapandian et al. [52]
proposed a method for the detection of gliomas tumors in
MRI images. Detection of gliomas tumor is a difficult task as
it has a low sensitive boundary pixel. Non-sub-sampled con-
tourlet transform (NSCT) was used to enhance the quality
of MRI images. Morphological operations were performed
for image segmentation. ANIFIS is used as a classifier to
classify into normal MRI images and gliomas tumors. It was
performed on the BRATS dataset. The result of the proposed
methodology was compared with a different state of the arts.
Vijay et al. [53] also used ANIFIS as a classifier, but the
tracking algorithm was used for preprocessing, Gaussian fil-
ter for image enhancement, and enhanced Darwinian particle
swarm optimization (EDPSO) for segmentation.
2.1.3 Detection using hybrid approach
To enhance the classification of the model, a hybrid approach
is used in the model. The hybrid approach means combin-
ing two or more classifiers to increase the accuracy of the
model and minimize the error rate of the model. Shakeel
et al. [54] proposed a classification system that uses Machine
learning based on a backpropagation neural network. This
classification algorithm was used to classify the medical
image into normal and abnormal images. Accuracy, sensi-
tivity, and specificity are the performance parameters used to
measure the performance of the classification model. 93.33%
of accuracy, 71.42% of sensitivity, and 88.88% of specificity
were attained by the proposed model. Raju et al. [55] pro-
posed a model that was Bayesian HCS-based multi-SVNN.
Accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity were used to measure
the performance of the proposed classification model. 93%
of accuracy, 96.9% of sensitivity, and 99.29% of specificity
were attained by the proposed model.
Hashemzehi et al. [56] proposed a hybrid model based on
deep Learning. The proposed methodology was implemented
in 3064 MRI images taken from 233 patients. The presented
architecture consists of neural autoregression distribution
estimation (NADE) and CNN. It removes the unwanted
features and extracts only the essential features for image
classification. It consists of 708 MRI images of meningioma,
1426 MRI images of glioma, and 930 MRI images of pituitary
brain tumor. This hybrid technology is also compared with
other popular methods in the literature. The hybrid CNN-
NADE achieved 95.05% of accuracy. Iftekharuddin et al.
[57] proposed a framework for improved tumor segmentation
and classification. It was based on machine learning and deep
281
learning approach along with the use of a fusion of two texture
feature extraction techniques. Piecewise-triangular-prism-
surface-area (PTPSA) and fractional Brownian motion (fBm)
are the two feature extraction algorithms. Self-organizing
map (SOM) is used as a feature fusion model and seg-
mentation. Further to classify MRI images into the tumor
and non-tumor image, a feed-forward neural network with a
Bayesian regularization classifier is used. It was implemented
on 204 MRI images. ROC was used for performance evalua-
tion. The value of true positive fraction (TPF) ranges between
75 to 100% for different patients, and the average value is
90% at 0.7 thresholds. Sharma et al. [58] proposed a hybrid
technique for retrieving information from MRI images. K-
means and artificial neural network model was used for the
classification of MRI images. GLCM was used for extract-
ing features from segmented MRI images. The experiment
results showed the effectiveness of our approach.
2.2 Comparison of various previous works
There are some existing approaches that were proposed for
the detection and classification of brain tumors, but these
approaches are not fully accurate. The previously proposed
techniques vary from soft computing to deep learning. Some
of the researchers have used accuracy, sensitivity, and speci-
ficity as performance evaluation parameters. The accuracy
parameter states the total correct prediction over the avail-
able data. The sensitivity parameter has the ability to identify
unhealthy patients, whereas the specificity parameter has the
ability to identify healthy patients. Table 3 analyzes some of
the research papers on the automatic detection of the brain
tumor. The table shows the results of the existing papers.
While Fig. 9 shows the taxonomy of the brain tumor detec-
tion system in machine learning as well as deep learning.
3 Performance analysis and results
Every author had analyzed their work through some perfor-
mance parameters and on the basis of those parameters work
of various authors where compared. This analysis will depict
which technology provides better results. There exist dif-
ferent parameters for the performance measure for example
accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. These parameters are
evaluated by the confusion matrix [28]. Tables 4, 5, and 6
depict techniques analysis through parameters.
• Accuracy
Accuracy refers to the total accurate predictions over the
dataset [78]. A comparison of different techniques through
123
282 International Journal of Multimedia Information Retrieval (2020) 9:271–290

Table 3 Comparative analysis of the work of various authors

Author Year Datasets Techniques Accuracy (%) Sensitivity (%) Specificity (%)

Anjali et al. [28] 2017 NA CART classification and 92.31 96.67 77.78
ensemble SVM-based
classification
Minz et al. [59] 2017 50 MRI images Threshold method, gray 89.90 88.23 62.5
level co-occurrence
matrix (GLCM),
Adaboost
Amin et al. [60] 2017 Three different datasets GLCM and SVM 97.1 91.9 98
were used, namely
Nashtar Hospital
Multan, Harvard dataset,
and TCIA
Cheng et al. [61] 2019 3064 MRI images ConvCaps 93.5 NA NA
Bahadure et al. [62] 2017 DICOM and Brain Web GLCM and SVM 96.51 97.72 94.2
dataset
Raju et al. [55] 2018 BRATS database Bayesian HCS-based 93 96.9 99.29
multi-SVNN
Kumar et al. [33] 2018 354 MRI images were Features extracted shape, 95.23 100 94.8
taken from online texture and intensity, and
database BRATS-2015 PSO-SVM
Shakeel et al. [54] 2018 NA MLBPNN (machine 93.33 71.42 88.88
learning-based back
propagating neural
network)
Chaudhary et al. [63] 2018 NA DWT and SVM 94.6 NA NA
Mallick et al. [64] 2019 RIDER NEURO-MRI Deep wavelet 96 NA NA
which contains data on auto-encoder-based deep
19 patients neural network
Song et al. [34] 2019 306 MRI images Adaptive threshold, PCA, 98.36 99.17 97.83
hybrid model of
PSO-KSVM
Kumar et al. [65] 2019 NA Ensemble classifier 91.17 95.47 NA
contains FFANN, SVM
and extreme learning
machine (EML)
Sriramakrishana et al. [66] 2019 BRATS 2013 and BRATS FCM and SVM 98 NA NA
2015
Sert et al. [10] 2019 200 MRI images in SISR, MFES, CNN, and 95 NA NA
DICOM format SVM
Marghalani et al. [67] 2019 TCIA, XNAT, Oasis, and SVM 97 NA NA
few from Google search
Deepak et al. [68] 2019 Figshare Deep CNN via transfer 98 NA NA
learning
Ghassemi et al. [69] 2019 3064 MRI images DNN 95.6 NA NA
Kurup et al. [70] 2019 3064 MRI images Capsulenet 92.6 NA NA
Eluri et al. [71] 2019 Brain Web dataset GLCM and SVM 96.66 97.74 94.54
Arasi et al. [72] 2019 NA BSVM 97.69 NA NA
Chandra et al. [73] 2020 BRATS dataset SVM 97.50 NA 96.08
Raja et al. [74] 2020 BRATS 2015 Hybrid deep auto-encoder 98.5 96 99.54
with Bayesian fuzzy
clustering
Hamid et al. [75] 2020 DICOM format MRI SVM 95 NA NA
images

123
International Journal of Multimedia Information Retrieval (2020) 9:271–290 283

Table 3 continued
Author Year Datasets Techniques Accuracy (%) Sensitivity (%) Specificity (%)

Çinar et al. [76] 2020 Kaggle site Hybrid CNN 97.2 NA NA

Begum et al. [77] 2020 1000 MRI images Texture feature and RNN 96.26 100 92.85
Kaplan et al. [35] 2020 3064 MRI images LBP and KNN 95.56 NA NA

Fig. 9 Taxonomy of brain tumor detection system

accuracy is shown in Table 4. A graphical representation of Sensitivity is defined as the total number of true positive pre-
the author’s work through accuracy is depicted in Fig. 10a. dictions divided by the total number of positives [78]. Table 6
shows the comparison of various existing techniques used in
True positive + true negative
Accuracy  (1) Table 2 through sensitivity. Figure 10c shows a performance
Positive + negative analysis through sensitivity.

True positive
Sensitivity  (3)
• Specificity Positive

Specificity is defined as the total number of correct negative

predictions divided by the total number of negatives [78]. 4 Conclusion
Table 5 shows the comparison of various existing techniques
used in Table 2 through specificity. Figure 10b shows the The increase in the number of brain tumors over the world
performance analysis through specificity. has led to an increase in the rate of deaths of people. Tumor
detection is a crucial step in the identification of the tumor.
True negative Early detection of the brain tumor may increase the survival
Specificity  (2)
Negative rate of the patient. Here, a range of previous work of authors
has been considered and their performance is analyzed. Fig-
• Sensitivity ure 11 shows the line graph of performance parameters such

123
284 International Journal of Multimedia Information Retrieval (2020) 9:271–290

100.00%
98.00%
96.00%

Percentage
94.00%
92.00%
90.00%
88.00%
86.00%
84.00%

Accuracy Authors

(a)

120.00%

100.00%

80.00%
Percentage

60.00%

40.00%

20.00%

0.00%

Specificity Authors

(b)

120.00%

100.00%

80.00%
Percentage

60.00%

40.00%

20.00%

0.00%

Sensitivity Authors

(c)
Fig. 10 Performance analyses a accuracy parameter, b specificity parameter, c sensitivity parameter

123
International Journal of Multimedia Information Retrieval (2020) 9:271–290
120.00%
100.00%
80.00%
Percentage
60.00%
40.00%
20.00%
0.00%
Authors
Fig. 11 Performance analyses through line graph
as accuracy, specificity, and sensitivity of the techniques used
in pre-existing research. It shows that Raja et al. [74] had the
best accuracy, i.e., 98.5% and best specificity, i.e., 99.54%
that employed hybrid deep auto-encoder with Bayesian fuzzy
clustering. Kumar et al. [33] used SVM as a classifier and
Begum et al. [77] used recurrent neural network (RNN) as a
classifier both had the highest sensitivity, i.e., 100%.
While Fig. 12 shows, analysis of techniques implemented
in pre-existing works. In automatic brain tumor detec-
tion system, a lot of diverse classification methods were
used specifically machine leaning techniques (KNN, SVM,
CART, and others), deep learning techniques (CNN, RNN,
and others), and hybrid techniques (soft computing and
machine learning). It plays a significant role in the detec-
tion and categorization of brain tumors. These classification
techniques have been compared and analyzed through a pie
chart to see what percent of the techniques had been used so
far as shown in Fig. 12a. It shows machine learning-based
classifier has been widely used for brain tumor classification
over other methods. On the other hand, feature extraction is
a key factor in this task. It considers the overall features of
the medical image. A range of different feature extraction
techniques exists, namely GLCM, intensity based, LPB, and
many more. The relationship between various feature extrac-
tion techniques has been compared as shown in Fig. 12b. It
depicts texture features are extensively used by authors over
the past years. Thus in the future, we can explore other tech-
niques of feature extraction and classification thoroughly,
which might provide better results and would help in the
285
Accuracy
Sensitivity
Specificity
timely diagnosis of diseases more efficiently and accurately.
Therefore, it can be applied to clinical needs.
4.1 Future challenges
The neuro-oncologists community had acknowledged exten-
sive consideration of various challenges that exist for making
correct diagnostic systems for brain tumor detection. The
numbers of brain tumor affected patients are increasing day
by day with the increase in population which indeed ampli-
fies the demand for computer-aided systems and health care
services. Grading of brain tumors is done to provide bet-
ter treatment and analysis of brain tumors. A brain tumor is
divided into four grades. Grade 1 and Grade 2 are low aggres-
sive brain tumors. Grade 3 and Grade 4 are highly aggressive
brain tumor. High-grade tumors affect the health of patients
and even lead to death if not treated properly. Therefore, the
identification of a brain tumor is a very challenging task. The
following are the future challenges that may be considered
in the research community.
1. Brain tumor segmentation
Image segmentation is one of the important steps for the
detection of tumors in the brain. It is a method used for the
division of brain MRI images into different segments as
a result only essential segments of the brain MRI image
will be processed rather than processing the whole brain
MRI image. Various techniques were used in prior state
of art like soft computing-based techniques, machine
123
286 International Journal of Multimedia Information Retrieval (2020) 9:271–290

Feature Extraction Techniques

Fig. 12 Analysis through pie
chart a feature extraction
technique analysis,
b classification technique
analysis

37% 37%
Texture Feature
Deep Feature
Hybrid Feature

26%

(a)
Classification Techniques

7%

29% Machine Learning

Deep Learning
Hybrid Technique
64%

(b)
learning-based techniques, and deep learning-based tech-
niques. Fuzzy deformable fusion model, NS-EMFSE,
K-means, SVM, morphological operation, and many
more were used for brain tumor segmentation [29, 32, 42,
50, 79]. The major future challenges are to remove a vari-
ety of noises from brain MRI images, further to enhance
the quality of the image, and at last to efficiently segment
the MRI image into essential parts. The correct segmen-
tation technique should be selected for the diagnostic
system. The better the accuracy of the segmentation, the
better will be the classification accuracy. This will indeed
increase the whole performance of the computer-aided
system. Therefore, in the future researcher can explore
more segmentation techniques that would provide 100%

123
International Journal of Multimedia Information Retrieval (2020) 9:271–290 287

Table 4 Analysis of techniques through accuracy Table 5 Analysis of techniques through specificity
Author Techniques used Accuracy (%) Author Techniques used Specificity (%)

Anjali et al. [28] CART classification and 92.31 Anjali et al. [28] CART classification and 77.78
ensemble SVM-based ensemble SVM-based
classification classification
Minz et al. [59] Adaboost 89.90 Minz et al. [59] Adaboost 62.5
Amin et al. [60] SVM 97.1 Amin et al. [60] SVM 98
Cheng et al. [61] GLCM and SVM 93.5 Bahadure et al. [62] GLCM and SVM 94.2
Bahadure et al. [62] ConvCaps 96.51 Raju et al. [55] Bayesian HCS-based 99.29
Raju et al. [55] Bayesian HCS-based 93 multi-SVNN
multi-SVNN Kumar et al. [33] SVM 94.8
Kumar et al. [33] SVM 95.23 Shakeel et al. [54] MLBPNN (machine 88.88
Shakeel et al. [54] MLBPNN (machine 93.33 learning-based back
learning-based back propagating neural
propagating neural network)
network) Song et al. [34] Hybrid model Of PSO-SVM 99.17
Chaudhary et al. [63] DWT and SVM 94.6 Eluri et al. [71] GLCM and SVM 94.54
Mallick et al. [64] Deep wavelet 96 Chandra et al. [73] SVM 96.08
auto-encoder-based Raja et al. [74] Hybrid deep auto-encoder 99.54
deep neural network with Bayesian fuzzy
Song et al. [34] Hybrid model Of 98.36 clustering
PSO-SVM Begum et al. [77] RNN 92.85
Kumar et al. [65] Ensemble classifier 91.17
contains FFANN,
SVM, and extreme Table 6 Analysis of techniques through sensitivity
learning machine
Author Techniques Used Sensitivity (%)
(EML)
Sriamakrishana et al. FCM and SVM 98 Anjali et al. [28] CART classification and 96.67
[66] ensemble SVM-based
Sert et al. [10] SVM 95 classification
Marghalani et al. [67] SVM 97 Minz et al. [59] Adaboost 88.23
Deepak et al. [68] Deep CNN via transfer 98 Amin et al. [60] SVM 91.9
learning Bahadure et al. [62] GLCM and SVM 97.72
Ghassemi et al. [69] DNN 95.6 Raju et al. [55] Bayesian HCS-based 96.9
Kurup et al. [70] Capsulenet 92.6 multi-SVNN
Eluri et al. [71] GLCM and SVM 96.66 Kumar et al. [33] SVM 100
Arasi et al. [72] BSVM 97.69 Shakeel et al. [54] MLBPNN (machine 71.42
learning-based back
Chandra et al. [73] SVM 97.50
propagating neural
Raja et al. [74] Hybrid deep 98.5 network)
auto-encoder with
Song et al. [34] Hybrid model Of PSO-SVM 99.17
Bayesian fuzzy
clustering Kumar et al. [65] Ensemble classifier contains 95.47
FFANN, SVM, and
Hamid et al. [75] SVM 95
extreme learning machine
Çinar et al. [76] Hybrid CNN 97.2 (EML)
Begum et al. [77] RNN 96.26 Eluri et al. [71] GLCM and SVM 97.74
Kaplan et al. [35] LBP and KNN 95.56 Raja et al. [74] Hybrid deep auto-encoder 96
with Bayesian fuzzy
clustering
Begum et al. [77] RNN 100
accuracy and efficiency along with less time consump-
tion [32]. Stated that the segmentation techniques should
be tested up to evaluation stage and tested in large dataset
with loads of variations [46]. Stated that the segmenta-
tion work should stretch to deep learning approaches. The
community [29, 42, 46, 50] stated that the deep learning

123
288
methods can be used to study MRI images to learn to
avoid irrelevant features for brain tumor segmentation.
2. Feature extraction
Feature extraction is yet another important step for the
detection of tumors in the brain. It is a method that
is used for extracting necessary features from the effi-
ciently segmented MRI image that would help in early
tumor detection. Shape and texture feature techniques
were used for extraction of features [33, 59, 60, 62, 63].
A correct feature helps in accurate detection and classi-
fication of brain tumors. Thereby researchers can extract
deep features or right relevant features that will provide
100% accuracy of classification. The community [23, 64,
68–70, 76] stated that deep features were extracted with
the help of deep learning techniques in prior state of work.
3. Classification of brain tumor
Classification of brain tumors plays a vital role in the
computer diagnostic system. Till to date, authors had only
focused on two or three types of classification, which is not
sufficient for clinical purposes. Some authors worked on clas-
sifying MRI images into normal and abnormal images [37,
42, 62, 76]. The community [28, 29, 32, 43, 50] stated that
MRI images were classified into two class classification, i.e.,
benign and malignant tumor. Authors also worked on three
type classification that is meningioma, glioma, and pituitary
tumor [35, 56]. In the future, the researcher could emphasize
four or more types of classification. This would certainly help
to detect the tumor at an early stage and provide timely treat-
ment. It could even be used for clinical purposes. Bahadure
et al. [62], stated that in future the authors can use selective
classifier technique by combining more than one classifier
with feature selection techniques.
Funding There is no funding source for both the authors.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest There is no conflict of interest.
Human and animal rights There is no involvement of animals and
humans as subjects.
References
1. Narasimhamurthy A (2017) An overview of machine learning in
medical image analysis. Med Imaging. https://doi.org/10.4018/97
8-1-5225-0571-6.ch002
2. Tyagi V (2018) Introduction to digital image processing. Underst
Digit Image Process. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315123905-1
3. Silva EA, Mendonça GV (2005) Digital image processing. In: Dorf
RC (ed) The electrical engineering handbook. CRC Press, Boca
123
International Journal of Multimedia Information Retrieval (2020) 9:271–290
Raton, pp 891–910. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-012170960-0/5
0064-5
4. Gan WS (2020) Digital image processing. Signal Process Image
Process Acoust Imaging. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-555
0-8_10
5. Arora A (2019) Fundamental steps of digital image processing.
https://medium.com/futframe-ai/fundamental-steps-of-digital-
image-processing-d7518d6bb23c
6. Kissane J, Neutze JA, Singh H (2020) MRI. In: Kissane J, Neutze
JA, Singh H (eds) Radiology fundamentals. Springer, Berlin, pp
33–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22173-7_7
7. Hardan H (2016) Image processing—Philadelphia Univer-
sity. https://www.philadelphia.edu.jo/academics/hhardan/uploads/
Image_Processing-ch1_part_1.pdf
8. Venkat E (2016) Digital image processing—lecture notes. https://
www.slideshare.net/ezhilyavenkat/digital-image-processing-
lecture-notes
9. Kurka PR, Salazar AA (2019) Applications of image process-
ing in robotics and instrumentation. Mech Syst Signal Process
124:142–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2019.01.015
10. Sert E, Özyurt F, Doğantekin A (2019) A new approach for
brain tumor diagnosis system: single image super resolution based
maximum fuzzy entropy segmentation and convolutional neural
network. Med Hypotheses 133:109413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
mehy.2019.109413
11. Seeram E (2020) Digital image processing concepts. Digit Radiogr.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-6522-9_2
12. Du E, Ives R, Nevel AV, She J (2011) Advanced image process-
ing for defense and security applications. EURASIP J Adv Signal
Process. https://doi.org/10.1155/2010/432972
13. Sun Z, Ng K, Ramli N (2011) Biomedical imaging research: a
fast-emerging area for interdisciplinary collaboration. https://www.
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22279498
14. Harif M, Stefan DC (2017) Early warning signs and diagnostic
approach in childhood cancer. Pediatr Cancer Afr. https://doi.org/
10.1007/978-3-319-17936-0_2
15. Deserno TM (2010) Fundamentals of biomedical image process-
ing. In: Deserno T (ed) Biomedical image processing biological
and medical physics, biomedical engineering. Springer, Berlin, pp
1–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15816-2_1
16. Banan R, Hartmann C (2017) The new WHO 2016 classification of
brain tumors-what neurosurgeons need to know. Retrieved October
10, 2020, from https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28093610/
17. Zimmerman RA, Bilaniuk LT (2000) Brain tumors. Neuroimaging.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-1152-5_27
18. Leece R, Xu J, Ostrom QT, Chen Y, Kruchko C, Barnholtz-Sloan
JS (2017) Global incidence of malignant brain and other central
nervous system tumors by histology, 2003–2007. Neuro-Oncology
19(11):1553–1564. https://doi.org/10.1093/neuonc/nox09
19. Alentorn A, Hoang-Xuan K, Mikkelsen T (2016) Presenting signs
and symptoms in brain tumors. In: Berger MS, Weller M (eds)
handbook of clinical neurology gliomas. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp
19–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-802997-8.00002-5
20. Abd-Ellah MK, Awad AI, Khalaf AA, Hamed HF (2019) A review
on brain tumor diagnosis from MRI images: practical implica-
tions, key achievements, and lessons learned. Magn Reson Imaging
61:300–318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mri.2019.05.028
21. Eckenstein M, Thomas AA (2020) Benign and malignant tumors
of the central nervous system and pregnancy. In: Steegers EAP,
Cipolla MJ, Miller EC (eds) Handbook of clinical neurology
and pregnancy: neuro-obstetric disorders. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp
241–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-444-64240-0.00014-3
22. Ata ES, Turgut M, Eraslan C, Dayanır YÖ (2016) Comparison
between dynamic susceptibility contrast magnetic resonance imag-
ing and arterial spin labeling techniques in distinguishing malignant
International Journal of Multimedia Information Retrieval (2020) 9:271–290
from benign brain tumors. Eur J Radiol 85(9):1545–1553. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2016.05.015
23. Spine M (2018) Brain biopsy. https://mayfieldclinic.com/pe-
brainbiopsy.htm
24. Babu AE, Subhash A, Rajan D, Jacob F, Kumar PA (2018) A sur-
vey on methods for brain tumor detection. In: 2018 conference on
emerging devices and smart systems (ICEDSS). https://doi.org/10.
1109/icedss.2018.8544353
25. Mehekare V (2017) Brain tumor detection using neural network.
Int J Adv Res Electr Electron Instrum Eng. https://doi.org/10.156
62/IJAREEIE.2017.0605082
26. Lahmiri S (2017) Glioma detection based on multi-fractal features
of segmented brain MRI by particle swarm optimization tech-
niques. Biomed Signal Process Control 31:148–155. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.bspc.2016.07.008
27. Devi N, Bhattacharyya K (2018) automatic brain tumor detection
and classification of grades of astrocytoma. In: Proceedings of the
international conference on computing and communication sys-
tems lecture notes in networks and systems, pp 125–135. https://
doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-6890-4_11
28. Anjali R, Priya S (2017) An efficient classifier for brain tumor clas-
sification. https://www.ijcsmc.com/docs/papers/August2017/V6I8
201711.pdf
29. Chander PS, Soundarya J, Priyadharsini R (2019) Brain tumour
detection and classification using K-means clustering and SVM
classifier. In: Abdul Majeed PP, Mat-Jizat J, Hassan M, Taha Z,
Choi H, Kim J (eds) Lecture notes in mechanical engineering RITA
2018. Springer, Singapore, pp 49–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-
981-13-8323-6_5
30. Rajan PG, Sundar C (2019) Brain tumor detection and segmenta-
tion by intensity adjustment. J Med Syst. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10916-019-1368-4
31. Vallabhaneni RB, Rajesh V (2018) Brain tumour detection using
mean shift clustering and GLCM features with edge adaptive
total variation denoising technique. Alex Eng J 57(4):2387–2392.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2017.09.011
32. Devkota B, Alsadoon A, Prasad P, Singh A, Elchouemi A (2018)
Image segmentation for early stage brain tumor detection using
mathematical morphological reconstruction. Procedia Comput Sci
125:115–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2017.12.017
33. Kumar A, Ashok A, Ansari MA (2018) Brain tumor classifica-
tion using hybrid model of PSO and SVM classifier. In: 2018
international conference on advances in computing, communica-
tion control and networking (ICACCCN). https://doi.org/10.1109/
icacccn.2018.8748787
34. Song G, Huang Z, Zhao Y, Zhao X, Liu Y, Bao M et al
(2019) A NONINVASIVE system for the automatic detection of
gliomas based on hybrid features and PSO-KSVM. IEEE Access
7:13842–13855. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2019.2894435
35. Kaplan K, Kaya Y, Kuncan M, Ertunç HM (2020) Brain tumor
classification using modified local binary patterns (LBP) feature
extraction methods. Med Hypotheses 139:109696. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.mehy.2020.109696
36. Abbasi S, Tajeripour F (2017) Detection of brain tumor in 3D
MRI images using local binary patterns and histogram orienta-
tion gradient. Neurocomputing 219:526–535. https://doi.org/10.1
016/j.neucom.2016.09.051
37. Amin J, Sharif M, Raza M, Saba T, Anjum MA (2019) Brain tumor
detection using statistical and machine learning method. Comput
Methods Programs Biomed 177:69–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
cmpb.2019.05.015
38. Hargrave M (2020) How deep learning can help prevent financial
fraud. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/deep-learning.asp
39. Afshar P, Plataniotis KN, Mohammadi A (2019) Capsule networks
for brain tumor classification based on MRI images and coarse
tumor boundaries. In: ICASSP 2019—2019 IEEE international
289
conference on acoustics, speech and signal processing (ICASSP).
https://doi.org/10.1109/icassp.2019.8683759
40. Maharjan S, Alsadoon A, Prasad P, Al-Dalain T, Alsadoon OH
(2020) A novel enhanced softmax loss function for brain tumour
detection using deep learning. J Neurosci Methods 330:108520.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2019.108520
41. Das S, Aranya OR, Labiba NN (2019) Brain tumor classifica-
tion using convolutional neural network. In: 2019 1st international
conference on advances in science, engineering and robotics tech-
nology (ICASERT). https://doi.org/10.1109/icasert.2019.8934603
42. Kumar S, Mankame DP (2020) Optimization driven deep convo-
lution neural network for brain tumor classification. Biocybern
Biomed Eng 40(3):1190–1204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbe.202
0.05.009
43. Ghahfarrokhi SS, Khodadadi H (2020) Human brain tumor diagno-
sis using the combination of the complexity measures and texture
features through magnetic resonance image. Biomed Signal Pro-
cess Control 61:102025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bspc.2020.1020
25
44. Saba T, Mohamed AS, El-Affendi M, Amin J, Sharif M (2020)
Brain tumor detection using fusion of hand crafted and deep learn-
ing features. Cogn Syst Res 59:221–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.cogsys.2019.09.007
45. Garg V, Bansal M, Sanjana A, Dave M (2020) Analysis and detec-
tion of brain tumor using U-net-based deep learning. In: Arai K,
Kapoor S, Bhatia R (eds) Advances in intelligent systems and com-
puting intelligent computing. Springer, Cham, pp 161–173. https://
doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52243-8_13
46. Amin J, Sharif M, Yasmin M, Fernandes SL (2018) Big data analy-
sis for brain tumor detection: deep convolutional neural networks.
Future Gener Comput Syst 87:290–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
future.2018.04.065
47. Zhang D, Huang G, Zhang Q, Han J, Han J, Yu Y (2020) Cross-
modality deep feature learning for brain tumor segmentation.
Pattern Recogn. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patcog.2020.107562
48. Dong H, Yang G, Liu F, Mo Y, Guo Y (2017) Automatic brain
tumor detection and segmentation using U-net based fully con-
volutional networks. In: Valdés HM, González-Castro V (eds)
Communications in computer and information science medical
image understanding and analysis. Springer, Cham, pp 506–517.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60964-5_44
49. Naser MA, Deen MJ (2020) Brain tumor segmentation and grading
of lower-grade glioma using deep learning in MRI images. Comput
Biol Med 121:103758. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compbiomed.202
0.103758
50. Özyurt F, Sert E, Avci E, Dogantekin E (2019) Brain tumor detec-
tion based on convolutional neural network with neutrosophic
expert maximum fuzzy sure entropy. Measurement 147:106830.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2019.07.058
51. Parveen, Singh A (2016) Detection of brain tumor in MRI images,
using fuzzy C-means segmented images and artificial neural net-
work. In: Proceedings of the international conference on recent
cognizance in wireless communication and image processing, pp
123–131. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-2638-3_14
52. Selvapandian A, Manivannan K (2018) Fusion based Glioma brain
tumor detection and segmentation using ANFIS classification.
Comput Methods Programs Biomed 166:33–38. https://doi.org/1
0.1016/j.cmpb.2018.09.006
53. Vijay V, Kavitha A, Rebecca SR (2016) Automated brain tumor
segmentation and detection in MRI using enhanced darwinian
particle swarm optimization (EDPSO). Procedia Comput Sci
92:475–480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2016.07.370
54. Shakeel PM, Tobely TE, Al-Feel H, Manogaran G, Baskar S (2019)
Neural network based brain tumor detection using wireless infrared
imaging sensor. IEEE Access 7:5577–5588. https://doi.org/10.110
9/access.2018.2883957
123
290
55. Raju AR, Suresh P, Rao RR (2018) Bayesian HCS-based multi-
SVNN: a classification approach for brain tumor segmentation and
classification using Bayesian fuzzy clustering. Biocybern Biomed
Eng 38(3):646–660. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbe.2018.05.001
56. Hashemzehi R, Mahdavi SJ, Kheirabadi M, Kamel SR (2020)
Detection of brain tumors from MRI images base on deep learn-
ing using hybrid model CNN and NADE. Biocybern Biomed Eng
40(3):1225–1232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbe.2020.06.001
57. Iftekharuddin KM, Zheng J, Islam MA, Ogg RJ (2009) Fractal-
based brain tumor detection in multimodal MRI. Appl Math
Comput 207(1):23–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2007.10.063
58. Sharma M, Purohit GN, Mukherjee S (2017) information retrieves
from brain mri images for tumor detection using hybrid technique
K-means and artificial neural network (KMANN). In: Perez G,
Mishra K, Tiwari S, Trivedi M (eds) Networking communication
and data knowledge engineering lecture notes on data engineer-
ing and communications technologies. Springer, Singapore, pp
145–157
59. Minz A, Mahobiya C (2017) MR image classification using
adaboost for brain tumor type. In: 2017 IEEE 7th international
advance computing conference (IACC).https://doi.org/10.1109/
iacc.2017.0146
60. Amin J, Sharif M, Yasmin M, Fernandes SL (2017) A distinctive
approach in brain tumor detection and classification using MRI.
Pattern Recogn Lett. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patrec.2017.10.036
61. Cheng Y, Qin G, Zhao R, Liang Y, Sun M (2019) ConvCaps: multi-
input capsule network for brain tumor classification. In: Gedeon T,
Wong K, Lee M (eds) Neural information processing lecture notes
in computer science. Springer, Cham, pp 524–534. https://doi.org/
10.1007/978-3-030-36708-4_43
62. Bahadure NB, Ray AK, Thethi HP (2017) Image analysis for MRI
based brain tumor detection and feature extraction using biologi-
cally inspired BWT and SVM. Int J Biomed Imaging 2017:1–12.
https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/9749108
63. Chaudhary A, Bhattacharjee V (2018) An efficient method for brain
tumor detection and categorization using MRI images by K-means
clustering & DWT. Int J Inf Technol 12(1):141–148. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s41870-018-0255-4
64. Mallick PK, Ryu SH, Satapathy SK, Mishra S, Nguyen GN, Tiwari
P (2019) Brain MRI image classification for cancer detection
using deep wavelet autoencoder-based deep neural network. IEEE
Access 7:46278–46287. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2019.2902
252
65. Kumar P, VijayKumar B (2019). Brain tumor MRI segmentation
and classification using ensemble classifier. https://www.ijrte.org/
wp-content/uploads/papers/v8i1s4/A10440681S419.pdf
66. Sriramakrishnan P, Kalaiselvi T, Rajeswaran R (2019) Modified
local ternary patterns technique for brain tumour segmentation
and volume estimation from MRI multi-sequence scans with GPU
CUDA machine. Biocybern Biomed Eng 39(2):470–487. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.bbe.2019.02.002
67. Marghalani BF, Arif M (2019) Automatic classification of brain
tumor and Alzheimer’s disease in MRI. Procedia Comput Sci
163:78–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2019.12.089
68. Deepak S, Ameer P (2019) Brain tumor classification using deep
CNN features via transfer learning. Comput Biol Med 111:103345.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compbiomed.2019.103345
123
International Journal of Multimedia Information Retrieval (2020) 9:271–290
69. Ghassemi N, Shoeibi A, Rouhani M (2020) Deep neural network
with generative adversarial networks pre-training for brain tumor
classification based on MR images. Biomed Signal Process Control
57:101678. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bspc.2019.101678
70. Kurup RV, Sowmya V, Soman KP (2019) Effect of data pre-
processing on brain tumor classification using capsulenet. In:
ICICCT 2019—system reliability, quality control, safety, main-
tenance and management, pp 110–119. https://doi.org/10.1007/97
8-981-13-8461-5_13
71. Eluri VR, Ramesh C, Dhipti SN, Sujatha D (2019) Analysis of
MRI-based brain tumor detection using RFCM clustering and SVM
classifier. In: Wang J, Reddy G, Prasad V, Reddy V (eds) Advances
in intelligent systems and computing soft computing and signal
processing. Springer, Singapore, pp 319–326. https://doi.org/10.1
007/978-981-13-3393-4_33
72. Arasi PR, Suganthi M (2019) A clinical support system for brain
tumor classification using soft computing techniques. J Med Syst.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-019-1266-9
73. Chandra SK, Bajpai MK (2020) Fractional mesh-free linear dif-
fusion method for image enhancement and segmentation for
automatic tumor classification. Biomed Signal Process Control
58:101841. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bspc.2019.101841
74. Raja PS, Rani AV (2020) Brain tumor classification using a hybrid
deep autoencoder with Bayesian fuzzy clustering-based segmenta-
tion approach. Biocybern Biomed Eng 40(1):440–453. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.bbe.2020.01.006
75. Hamid MA, Khan NA (2020) Investigation and classification of
MRI brain tumors using feature extraction technique. J Med Biol
Eng 40(2):307–317. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40846-020-00510-1
76. Çinar A, Yildirim M (2020) Detection of tumors on brain MRI
images using the hybrid convolutional neural network architecture.
Med Hypotheses 139:109684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mehy.202
0.109684
77. Begum SS, Lakshmi DR (2020) Combining optimal wavelet
statistical texture and recurrent neural network for tumour
detection and classification over MRI. Multimed Tools Appl
79(19–20):14009–14030. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-020-08
643-w
78. Burduk R, Trajdos P (2013) Construction of sequential classi-
fier using confusion matrix. In: Saeed K, Chaki R, Cortesi A,
Wierzchoń S (eds) Computer information systems and industrial
management lecture notes in computer science. Springer, Berlin,
pp 401–407. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40925-7_37
79. Rashid MHO, Mamun MA, Hossain MA, Uddin MP (2018) Brain
tumor detection using anisotropic filtering, SVM classifier and mor-
phological operation from MR images. In: International conference
on computer, communication, chemical, material and electronic
engineering, IC4ME2 2018, pp 3–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/IC4
ME2.2018.8465613
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to juris-
dictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.