Universal Journal of Computer Science and Engineering Technology

1 (2), 73-78, Nov. 2010.

© 2010 UniCSE, ISSN: 2219-2158

Cancer Diagnosis Using Modified Fuzzy Network

Essam Al-Daoud
Faculty of Science and Information Technology
Computer Science Department, Zarka University
13110 Zarka, Jordan
[email protected]

Abstract— in this study, a modified fuzzy c-means radial basis Fuzzy-Neuro system uses a learning procedure to find a set
functions network is proposed. The main purposes of the of fuzzy membership functions which can be expressed in form
suggested model are to diagnose the cancer diseases by using fuzzy if-then rules. Fuzzy-Neuro has many advantages: Firstly it
rules with relatively small number of linguistic labels, reduce the allows incorporating our experience and the previous
similarity of the membership functions and preserve the meaning knowledge into the classifier. Secondly it provides an
of the linguistic labels. The modified model is implemented and understanding about the characteristic of the dataset. Thirdly it
compared with adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS). helps to find the dependencies in the datasets. Fourthly it gives
The both models are applied on "Wisconsin Breast Cancer" data an explanation which allows us to test the internal logic [6-8].
set. Three rules are needed to obtain the classification rate 97% by
In this paper, a new intelligent decision support system for
using the modified model (3 out of 114 is classified wrongly). On
the contrary, more rules are needed to get the same accuracy by
cancer diagnosis is constructed and tested. The suggested
using ANFIS. Moreover, the results indicate that the new model is system is based on a modified version of fuzzy c-means
more accurate than the state-of-art prediction methods. The method and radial basis functions neural network. It can be
suggested neuro-fuzzy inference system can be re-applied to many trained to establish a quality prediction system for a cancer
applications such as data approximation, human behavior disease with different parameters. Moreover the suggested
representation, forecasting urban water demand and identifying neuro-fuzzy inference system can be applied to many
DNA splice sites. applications such as data approximation, dynamic system
processing, urban water demand forecasting, identifying DNA
splice sites and image compression. In general the suggested
Keywords- fuzzy c-means, radial basis functions, fuzzy- model can be applied to any data needs classification,
neuro, rules, cancer diagnosis interpretation, adaptation or rules' extraction. For example the
human behavioral representation in synthetic forces consists
I. INTRODUCTION from several fuzzy parameters; e.g., interactions, responses,
The subjectivity of the specialist is an important problem of biomechanical, physical, psychophysical and psychological
diagnosing a new patient. It can be noted that the decision of parameters. Such this data are very suitable to be modeled by
the professionals is related to the last diagnostic. Therefore, to using the suggested neuro-fuzzy inference system due to the
enhance the diagnostic and to interpret the patients signal fact that human behavior represents highly complex nonlinear
accurately, the huge volume of the empirical input- output data and adaptable systems.
must be automated and used effectively. Cancer diagnosis can
be seen as a matching procedure whose objective is to match II. FUZZY-NEURO SYSTEMS
each set of the symptoms (feature space) to a specific case. Fuzzy-Neuro system can be designed by using various
Many studies have been introduced to develop cancer diagnosis architectures. To improve the performance of the system, three
systems by using intelligent computation see for example [1-2]. matters must be handled: finding the optimal number of the
Kiyan and Yildirim applied general regression neural network, rules, discovering the appropriate membership functions, and
multilayer perceptrons (MLP), and probabilistic neural network tuning of both. The following is a short overview of the major
on Wisconsin breast cancer dataset. They show that the general works in this area [9-12]:
regression neural network is the most accurate model for breast
cancer classification [3]. Zhou et al. introduced a new system  Fuzzy Adaptive Learning Control Network
based on neural network ensemble [4]. They named it Neural (FALCON): FALCON consists from five layers. Tow
Ensemble Based Detection (NED) and used it to identify the nodes for input data, one for the desired output and the
images of the cancer cells. Radial Basis Functions (RBF) rest is for the actual output. The supervised learning is
represents alternative approach to MLP’s in universal function implemented by using backpropagation algorithm .
approximation [5]. It outperforms MLP due to the convergence  Generalized Approximate Reasoning Based
speed and the capability in handling the non-stationary Intelligent Control (GARIC): Several specialized
datasets. feedforward network are used to implement GARIC. The

73
Corresponding Author: Essam Al-Daoud, Computer Science Department, Zarka University, Jordan.
 UniCSE 1 (2), 73 -78, 2010
main disadvantage of GARIC is the complexity of the 2- O1,i   Bi  2 ( x) i=3,4
learning algorithm.
 Neuro-Fuzzy Controller (NEFCON): NEFCON
3- O2,i  O1,i  O1,i 2 i=1,2
Consists from two phases. The first is used to embed the 4- O2,i i=1,2
O3,i 
rules and the second modifies and shifts the fuzzy sets. O2,1  O2,2
The main disadvantage of NEFCON is that it needs a 5- O4,i  O3,i f i  O3,i ( pi x  qi x  ri ) i=1,2
previously defined rule base.
 Adaptive Network Based Fuzzy Inference System
6- O5,1   O4,i
(ANFIS): ANFIS works with different activation
functions and uses un-weighted connections in each The membership function for A (or B) can be any
layer. ANFIS consists from five layers and can be parameterized membership function such as:
adapted by a supervised learning algorithm. or (1)
 Neuro-Fuzzy Classification (NEFCLASS) NEFCLASS A 
1
2
can be created from scratch by learning or it can be  x  ci 
1   
refined by using partial knowledge about patterns.  ai 
 Fuzzy Learning Vector Quantization (FLVQ): FLVQ  x  ci 
2
 A  exp(   ) (2)
is based on the fuzzification of LVQ and it is similar to
Adaptive Resonance Theory (ART). The main  ai 
disadvantage of FLVQ is not tested widely [13].
 Evolutionary Fuzzy Neural Network (EFNN): EFNN Network can be trained by finding suitable parameters for
uses evolutionary algorithms to train the fuzzy neural layer 1 and 4. Gradient decent are typically used for non linear
network, Aliev et. At. Train the recurrent fuzzy neural parameters of layer 1 while batch or recursive least squares are
networks by using an effective differential evolution used for linear parameters of layer 4 or even combination of
optimization (DEO) [14]. both.

The proposed method will be compared with ANFIS for III. THE PROPOSED MODEL
two reasons: firstly ANFIS has been written in many
programming languages including Matlab fuzzy logic toolbox. The main purposes of the suggested model are to diagnose
Secondly ANFIS is widely tested in various applications such the cancer diseases by using fuzzy rules with relatively small
as noise cancellation, system identification, time series number of linguistic labels, reduce the similarity of the
prediction, medical diagnosis systems, and control [15]. Fig. 1 membership functions and preserve the meaning of the
illustrates the architecture of ANFIS. For simplicity, we assume linguistic labels. The learning algorithm of the proposed model
that ANFIS has two inputs x and y and one output z, suppose consists of three phases:
that the rule base contains two fuzzy if-then rules of Takagi and
Sugeno’s type [16]: Phase 1: Modified fuzzy c-means algorithm (MFCM). The
standard fuzzy c-means has various well-known problems,
namely the number of the clusters must be specified in
Rule 1: If x is A1 and y is B1, then f1 = p1x + q1y + r1 advanced, the output membership functions have high
Rule 2: If x is A2 and y is B2, then f2 = p2x + q2y + r2 similarity, and FCM is unsupervised method and cannot
preserve the meaning of the linguistic labels. On the contrary,
the grid partitions method solves some of the previous matters,
but it has very high number of the output clusters. The basic
idea of the suggested MFCM algorithm is to combine the
advantages of the two methods, such that, if more than one
cluster's center exist in one partition then merge them and
calculate the membership values again, but if there is no
cluster's center in a partition then delete it and redefined the
other clusters. Algorithm 1 illustrates the modified fuzzy c-
means algorithm
Figure 1. ANFIS architecture
Algorithm 1. Modified fuzzy c-means algorithm
Input: Pattern vector, target vector, K the number of the
Let Oj,i represents the output of the ith node in the layer j, the patterns and the partitions intervals of each attribute
ANFIS output is calculated by using the following steps [16]: Pk , i k
Output: Centers, membership values and the new projected
1- O1,i   Ai ( x) i =1 ,2 partitions.

74
 UniCSE 1 (2), 73 -78, 2010
1- Delete all the attributes that have low correlation participate means that the membership is not less than T for
with the target each attribute. In this paper T=0.5).
2- For each class in the target vector apply the Phase 3: Modified RBF learning algorithm (MRBF). Fig. 2
following steps on the corresponding patterns. shows the architecture of the MRBF, the hidden layers consist
3- Choose c=K/2 seeds (first c patterns are selected as from n layer, where n is the number of the target classes. Each
seeds). hidden layer growths iteratively, one node (Rule) per iteration
4- Compute the membership values M using until accurate solution is found. The output layer consists from
n nodes, one node for each class. The MRBF is trained by
1 , k=1,2,…K and q>1. solving the system of equations using pseudo-inverse.
mik  2 /(q 1)
c  || u  c || 
  || u k  c i || 
j 1 k j 
(3)

5- Calculate c cluster centers using:

K
 mikq uk (4)
k 1
ci  K
 mikq
k 1

6- Compute the objective function.

c c K
J ( M , c1, c2 ,..., cc )   J i   mik
q
|| uk  ci ||2 Figure 2. MRBF architecture
i 1 i 1 k 1
(5) Algorithm 2. Modified RBF learning algorithm.
Input: Pattern vector, target vector, K the number of the
7- If either J is less than a certain threshold level or the patterns
improvement in the previous iteration is less than a Output: The weight of the hidden-output layer, the
certain tolerance then go to step 8, else go to step 4. representative rules
8- If there are centers that exist in one partition= 1- Pick up the next highest weight of the rules (centers)
K for class i and represent it as new node in the hidden
 Pk ,i k
then merge it
layer i.
k 1 2- Calculate the new outputs of all the hidden layers and
n
all the patterns. Where the output of the node j and
 cv the pattern k is
cnew  v 1 , c=c-v+1
|| xk t j ||2  j 2
n kj = φ ( || xk  t j ||  j ) = e
(6)
(8)
9- If all partitions that are related to a projected tj is the current center(rule) and  is the width.
K 3- Find the new weights of the hidden-output layer for

partition = Pk , i
h  Pk , i k
do not contain a each class by solving the following system:
k 1, k  h
center then delete the projected partition Pk , i and w1 w2 ... wz T    t1 t2 ... t z T (9)
h
redefined the attribute h partitions.
Where z is the number of the processed centers (rules)

10- If step 8 or 9 is true then go to step 4. and  is the pseudo-inverse of the matrix 

Phase 2: Sort the initial fuzzy rules (centers) for each target  11 12 ... 1z 
class, the weight of rule x with regard to class y is calculated   ... 2 z 
as following:    21 22 (10)
 ... ... ... ... 
z  
W ( R xy )  NPy   NPi , (7)  
 k1 k 2 ... kz 
i 1, i  y
Where NP is the number of patterns that have high participate 4- If the error is less than a threshold then stop, else go
in the antecedents and the consequences of the rule x (the high to step 1

75
 UniCSE 1 (2), 73 -78, 2010
IV. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS shown in Table 2. The deleted partitions can be substituted by
In this section we will apply ANFIS and the modified its neighborhood partition; for example, if the large partition is
Fuzzy RBF (MFRBF) on "Wisconsin Breast Cancer" data set. deleted then the medium partition means (medium or large).
This data set contains 569 instances (patterns) distributed into The projected partitions in Table 2 indicate that the fifth feature
two classes (357 benign and 212 malignant). Features are (smoothness) can be ignored.
computed from a digitized image of a fine needle aspirate
(FNA) of a breast mass [17]. The number of the attributes that TABLE II. THE OUTPUT PROJECTED PARTITIONS
are used in this paper is 11 (10 real-valued input features and
Feature Max Min Correlation
diagnosis). The features are summarized in Table 1. value Value
Radius 28.1 6.981 0.7300
TABLE I. DIAGNOSTIC BREAST CANCER FEATURES Texture 39.3 9.710 0.4152
Perimeter 188.5 43.790 0.7426
Feature Max Min Correlation Area 2501 143.50 0.7090
value Value Smoothness 0.2 0.0526 0.3586
Radius 28.1 6.981 0.7300 Compactness 0.3 0.0194 0.5965
Texture 39.3 9.710 0.4152 Concavity 0.4 0 0.6964
Perimeter 188.5 43.790 0.7426 Concave points 0.2 0 0.7766
Area 2501 143.50 0.7090 Symmetry 0.3 0.106 0.3305
Smoothness 0.2 0.0526 0.3586 Fractal dimension 0.1 0.05 -0.0128
Compactness 0.3 0.0194 0.5965
Concavity 0.4 0 0.6964
Concave points 0.2 0 0.7766 In phase 2, the rules are sorted according to its weights, the
Symmetry 0.3 0.106 0.3305 highest weight rule is:
Fractal dimension 0.1 0.05 -0.0128

Matlab 7.0 is used to implement the both algorithms, the If (radius is small and texture is small and perimeter is
data is normalized by using the Matlab function premnmx() small and area is small and compactness is small and concavity
and then the correlation between each feature and the target is is small and concave point is small)
calculated and listed in Table 1. It can be observed that the Then Benign
symmetry feature and fractal dimension feature have the lowest
correlation, thus they are deleted and the other 8 features are
used. Fig. 3 shows the first feature (Radius) distribution. A k- For simplicity, the above rule will be written as following:
folding scheme with k=5 is applied. The training procedure is
repeated 5 times, each time with 80% (455 patterns) of the if (s, s, s, s, s, s, s) then Benign
patterns as training and 20% (114) for testing. All the reported
results are obtained by averaging the outcomes of the five The number of the layers are needed in phase 3 is two
separate tests. hidden layers, and one output layer, after two nodes (rules) are
added to the hidden layers (one for each), the classification
rate becomes 96% (4 out of 114 is classified wrongly). If
another node is added to the first layer then the classification
rate becomes 97% (3 out of 114 is classified wrongly). Table 3
compares the number of rules and the accuracy that are
generated by ANFIS and MFRBF.

TABLE III. COMPARISON BETWEEN ANFIS AND MFRBF

Method Rules classification

Number rate
ANFIS 2,  =0.8 0.9474
MFRBF 2 0.9649
ANFIS 2, =0.5 0.9386
MFRBF 2 0.9649
ANFIS 3, =0.4 0.9474
Figure 3. The first feature (Radius) distribution MFRBF 3 0.9737
ANFIS 7, =0.3 0.9737
The initial shadow partitions for each feature in Algorithm MFRBF 7 0.9737
ANFIS 19, =0.2 0.9649
1 is chosen to be (small, Medium, Large) corresponding to ([-1,
MFRBF 19 0.9821
-3.3), [-3.3,3.3), [3.3,1]). The number of the initial centers
(rules) is K/2=227. After running Algorithm 1 for 7 epochs
many centers are merged and the final number of the centers is Table 3 indicates that by using MFRBF we can get high
23. On the other hand, the projected partitions are redefined as accuracy with fewer rules. On the contrary, by using ANFIS

76
 UniCSE 1 (2), 73 -78, 2010
more rules are needed to get the same accuracy. Moreover the V. CONCLUSION
features projected partition in ANFIS is ambiguous and can To produce unambiguous rules that are suitable for cancer
not preserve the meaning of the linguistic labels, see Fig. 4. diagnosis, a modified fuzzy c-means radial basis functions
(MFRBF) is introduced. The experimental results show that:
we can use MFRBF to get high accuracy with fewer and
unambiguous rules. The classification rate is 97% (3 out of 114
is classified wrongly) by using only three rules. On the
contrary, more rules are needed to get the same accuracy by
using ANFIS. Moreover the features projected partition in
ANFIS is ambiguous and can not preserve the meaning of the
linguistic labels. The results indicate that MFRBF is superior to
state-of-art prediction methods, where the balance error rate is
2.2 by using MFRBF, while the balance error rate is 9.92 by
using nonlinear support vector machine.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This research is funded by the Deanship of Research and
Graduate Studies in Zarka University /Jordan
Figure 4. Ambiguous membership functions that are generated by ANFIS
REFERENCES
The following is a sample rule produced by ANFIS: [1] L. Fengjun, “Function approximation by neural networks,” Proceedings
If (in1 is in1mf1) and (in2 is in2mf1) and (in3 is in3mf1) and of the 5th international symposium on Neural Networks: Advances in
(in4 is in4mf1) and (in5 is in5mf1) and (in6 is in6mf1) and Neural Networks, Beijing, China, pp. 384-390, 2008.
(in7 is in7mf1) and (in8 is in8mf1) [2] V. S. Bourdès, S. Bonnevay, P. Lisboa, M. S. H. Aung, S. Chabaud, T.
Then (out1 is out1mf1) Bachelot, D. Perol and S. Negrier, “Breast cancer predictions by neural
networks analysis: a Comparison with Logistic Regression,” 29th
Annual International Conference of the IEEE EMBS Cité Internationale,
On the other Hand, the output rules in MFRDF are Lyon, France, pp. 5424-5427, 2007.
unambiguous and do not need any farther processing. The best [3] T. Kiyani, and T. Yildirim, “Breast cancer diagnosis using statistical
number of the rules is trade-off between the accuracy and the neural networks,” Journal of Electrical & Electronics Engineering, vol 4,
no. 2, pp. 1149-1153, 2004.
rules number, for example, the following three rules are
[4] Z. Zhou, Y. Jiang, Y. Yang, and S. Chen, “Lung cancer cell
recommend, these rules are produced by MFRBF with identification based on artificial neural network ensembles,” Artificial
acceptable classification accuracy (97%): Intelligence In Medicine, vol 24, no. 1, pp. 25-36, 2002.
[5] Y.J. Oyang, S.C. Hwang and Y.Y. Ou, “Data classification with radial
If (s, s, s, s, s, s, s) then Benign basis function networks based on a novel kernel density estimation
If (m or l, m or l, m or l, m or l, m or l, m or l, m or l) algorithm,” IEEE Transaction on Neural networks, vol. 16, no. 1, pp.
225-236, 2005.
Then Malignant
[6] k. Rahul, S. Anupam and T. Ritu, “Fuzzy Neuro Systems for Machine
If (m or l, m or l, m or l, s, m or l, s , m or l) then Malignant Learning for Large Data Sets,” Proceedings of the IEEE International
Advance Computing Conference 6-7, Patiala, India, pp.541-545, 2009.
In Table 4, CLOP package are used to implement and to [7] C. Juang, R. Huang and W. Cheng, “An interval type-2 fuzzy-neural
compare the suggested model with the state-of-art prediction network with support-vector regression for noisy regression problems,”
methods (CLOP Package http://clopinet.com/CLOP/). Two IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 686 – 699,
2010.
measurements are used: Balance Error Rate (BER) and Area
[8] C., Juang, Y. Lin and C. Tu, “Recurrent self-evolving fuzzy neural
Under Carve (AUC). The results indicate that MFRBF is more network with local feedbacks and its application to dynamic system
accurate than the other methods, where the balance error rate processing,” Fuzzy Sets and Systems, vol. 161, no. 19, pp. 2552-2562,
is 2.2, while the balance error rate is 9.92 by using nonlinear 2010.
support vector machine (NonLinearSVM). [9] S. Alshaban and R., Ali, “Using neural and fuzzy software for the
classification of ECG signals,” Research Journal of Applied Sciences,
Engineering and Technology, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 5-10, 2010.
TABLE IV. COMPARISON BETWEEN THE STATE-OF-ART PREDICTION
METHODS [10] W. Li, and Z. Huicheng, “Urban water demand forecasting based on HP
filter and fuzzy neural network,” Journal of Hydroinformatics, vol. 12,
Testing no. 2, pp. 172–184, 2010.
Method
BER AUC [11] K. Vijaya, K. Nehemiah, H. Kannan and N.G. Bhuvaneswari, “Fuzzy
ANFIS 4.41 98.49 neuro genetic approach for predicting the risk of cardiovascular
diseases,“ Int. J. Data Mining, Modelling and Management, vol. 2, pp.
MFRBF 2.20 99.21 388-402, 2010.
NeuralNet 6.15 97.81 [12] A. Talei, L. Hock, C. Chua and C. Quek, “A novel application of a
LinearSVM 12.36 93.75 neuro-fuzzy computational technique in event-based rainfall-runoff
Kridge 8.53 96.22 modeling,” Expert Systems with Applications: An International Journal,
NaiveBayes 10.4 95.21 vol. 37, no. 12, pp. 7456-7468, 2010.
NonLinearSVM 9.92 96.98

77
 UniCSE 1 (2), 73 -78, 2010
[13] Y. S. Kim, “Fuzzy neural network with a fuzzy learning rule
emphasizing data near decision boundary,” Advances in Neural
Networks, vol. 5552, pp. 201-207, 2009.
[14] R. A. Aliev, B. G. Guirimov, B. Fazlollahi and R. R. Aliev,
“Evolutionary algorithm-based learning of fuzzy neural networks,” Part
2: Recurrent fuzzy neural networks, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, vol. 160,
no. 17, pp. 2553-2566, 2009.
[15] C. P. Kurian, S. Kuriachan, J. Bhat, and R. S. Aithal, “An adaptive
neuro fuzzy model for the prediction and control of light in integrated
lighting schemes,” Lighting Research & Technology, vol. 37, no. 4, pp.
343-352, 2005.
[16] E. Al-Daoud, “Identifying DNA splice sites using patterns statistical
properties and fuzzy neural networks, EXCLI Journal, vol. 8, pp. 195-
202, 2009.
[17] O. L. Mangasarian, W. N. Street and W. H. Wolberg, “Breast cancer
diagnosis and prognosis via linear programming,” Operations Research,
vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 570-577, 1995.

78