# Diagnosis of Multiple Sclerosis Disease in Brain Magnetic Resonance Imaging Based on the Harris Hawks Optimization Algorithm

Authors: Amal F. A. Iswisi; Oğuz Karan; Javad Rahebi
Journal: BioMed Research International
 (2021)

---

## Abstract

The damaged areas of brain tissues can be extracted by using segmentation methods, most of which are based on the integration of machine learning and data mining techniques. An important segmentation method is to utilize clustering techniques, especially the fuzzy C-means (FCM) clustering technique, which is sufficiently accurate and not overly sensitive to imaging noise. Therefore, the FCM technique is appropriate for multiple sclerosis diagnosis, although the optimal selection of cluster centers can affect segmentation. They are difficult to select because this is an NP-hard problem. In this study, the Harris Hawks optimization (HHO) algorithm was used for the optimal selection of cluster centers in segmentation and FCM algorithms. The HHO is more accurate than other conventional algorithms such as the genetic algorithm and particle swarm optimization. In the proposed method, every membership matrix is assumed as a hawk or an HHO member. The next step is to generate a population of hawks or membership matrices, the most optimal of which is selected to find the optimal cluster centers to decrease the multiple sclerosis clustering error. According to the tests conducted on a number of brain MRIs, the proposed method outperformed the FCM clustering and other techniques such as thek-NN algorithm, support vector machine, and hybrid data mining methods in accuracy.


---

## Body

## 1. Introduction

Medical imaging, e.g., magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the brain, is a method which helps physicians diagnose some of the brain diseases such as multiple sclerosis (MS). For the accurate diagnosis of MS that changes brain tissue, physicians use brain MRIs and attempt to identify the edges and borders of a damaged area. The accurate detection of the damaged area in brain tissues can help physicians administer a more effective treatment for MS and monitor its progress. Regarding the diagnosis of MS, a serious challenge is to accurately detect the areas and edges of damaged tissues in the brain. It is possible to employ knowledge discovery techniques such as machine learning and data mining to detect these areas, also known as lesions. An important application of image processing is in medicine and medical diagnosis through the use of images. Integrating specific techniques such as data mining and machine learning with image processing methods can be used as an appropriate approach to the analysis of medical images. Physicians benefit from medical images to diagnose certain diseases such as Alzheimer’s [1], Parkinson’s [2], and brain tumors [3] because brain tissues are not normally observable for analysis. Hence, physicians use these images to diagnose relevant diseases. Diagnosing the diseases of the brain and nervous system depends on medical images, and it is possible to capture relatively clear images of brain tissues through certain technologies such as X-ray and magnetic fields. These images can then be used for medical diagnosis [4]. Since MRI benefits from the magnetic technology with no significant reported harm, it is widely used for the analysis of brain diseases because this method of imaging harms none of the very sensitive brain tissues [4, 5]. MRIs can also be employed to diagnose MS. Analyzing these images, physicians can determine what part of the brain has been damaged and to what extent the disease has spread. Physicians mostly disagree on distinguishing MS edges from healthy tissues. Many physicians attempt to consult each other to detect MS edges so that they can properly deal with the disease or its spread in operation or possible treatment [5]. In other words, physicians attempt to separate MS areas from brain tissue with the least possible errors. This is considered a difficult process. Various methods have been proposed for the diagnosis of MS. Most of these methods are based on data mining and machine learning techniques and require a great deal of training to extract MS areas to some extent. Instances of these methods are artificial neural networks [6], support vector machines [3], clustering [7], k-NN algorithm [8], and genetic algorithm [9].An automatic method of diagnosing MS is to benefit from knowledge discovery techniques such as clustering for the analysis of medical images. In addition to simplicity, these techniques are efficient enough for medical imaging analysis. Clustering methods can be employed to extract the areas and edges of objects and MS lesions accurately. Various clustering techniques have been proposed so far. One of them is the fuzzy C-means (FCM) clustering algorithm [10] which is not highly sensitive to noise and can detect the edges of MS tissues to some extent; thus, it can be used in the segmentation of brain tissues. In fact, segmentation methods are a series of techniques used in image processing to identify and separate different objects of an image [10]. These methods can be utilized to diagnose MS by distinguishing damaged brain tissues from other tissues. Clustering techniques, especially the FCM clustering, are appropriate for the diagnosis of MS; nevertheless, it is difficult to select optimal cluster centers affecting segmentation because it is an NP-hard problem. The FCM clustering algorithm can be improved by adopting an optimization approach and using a metaheuristic algorithm to select the optimal cluster centers. This study benefits from the Harris Hawks optimization (HHO), proposed in 2019. This algorithm is characterized by an accurate modeling procedure including different sets of behavior for search; therefore, it is highly capable of solving complicated problems and is employed to improve the FCM clustering algorithm in detecting MS lesions and identifying damaged brain tissues. This paper consists of different sections. First, the HHO algorithm is discussed, and then the FCM clustering method is introduced. After that, the MS literature is reviewed through data mining, and the proposed method is formulated. Finally, the test results and conclusion are presented.


## 2. Harris Hawks Optimization Algorithm

Swarm intelligence is a type of optimization algorithm in which population members benefit from group information and each other’s position to solve an optimization problem. In most of the metaheuristic algorithms with a swarm intelligence approach, the group hunting behavior is modeled in a way that population members gather around a bait or the current optimum and attempt to search its surroundings for the right opportunity for attack. In nature, the group hunting behavior is observed among different creatures such as insects, arthropods, and mammals. Swarm intelligence systems can consist of the reactions of a few creatures in cooperation. An instance of such systems is the Harris Hawks optimization algorithm, proposed and modeled in 2019 [11]. Hawks usually cooperate with each other in flocks of at most six to go hunting. They fly around a bait and hunt it. Figure 1 shows this behavior.Figure 1
Hunting mechanism of swarm intelligence in the Harris Hawks optimization algorithm [11].It is believed that the adaptability to group hunting lies in the lack of baits in the desert climate which hawks live in. According to the behavior of these creatures, a small flock decides to go hunting first. Then other members participate in hunting for cooperation. In this hunting method, all hawks or solutions scatter around the bait or the optimal solution which one bird hunts. It is observed in this algorithm that the bait is identified first, and then it is surrounded. Finally, it is attacked. Every hawk is a solution, and the current optimal solution is regarded as the position of a rabbit on which the hawks fly. In this algorithm, hawks first search the problem space to find a bait and attack it then. The following equation can be employed to model the random and initial search behavior of hawks [11]:
(1)Xt+1=Xrandt−r1Xrandt−2r2.Xtrand≥0.5Xrabbitt−XMt−r3LB+r4UB−LBrand<0.5.In this equation,Xt shows the current position of a hawk or a solution in the current iteration or t, and Xt+1 indicates the position of a hawk in the new iteration. Furthermore, Xrabbitt is the position of the most optimal solution, and Xrandt is the random position in the problem space when XMt shows the center of gravity of the population of hawks. Furthermore, r1, r2, r3, and r4 are the random numbers ranging from 0 to 1 when LB and UB indicate the lower and upper limits of the solutions, respectively, in the problem space. The following equation can be employed to calculate XMt which shows the number of solutions for N hawks:
(2)XMt=1N∑i=1NXit.In this equation,Xit indicates the position of a solution such as the ith hawk, and XMt is the center of gravity of the population. In the HHO, there is a coefficient called the energy coefficient, which gradually changes the behavior of hawks from searching to hunting. Equation (3) shows this behavior. In this equation, the value of parameter E decreases rapidly from a specific value such as 2 to zero. In Figure 2, this behavior change of E can be seen in different iterations. In this equation, E0 is the initial energy, and t is the current iteration number when T is the maximum iteration of the algorithm:
(3)E=2E01−tT.Figure 2
Decrease ine based on the iteration of the HHO algorithm.In the HHO algorithm, there is a series of behaviors which can be utilized to solve the problem and direct the population. This series of behaviors is now addressed.


### 2.1. Soft Siege

In the HHO algorithm, soft siege refers to the time when a hawk moves gradually toward a bait and searches around it. The following equations are employed to model this behavior to update the positions of hawks:(4)Xt+1=∆Xt−EJ.Xrabbitt−Xt,(5)∆Xt=Xrabbitt−Xt.In these equations,J is a random value ranging between zero and two. It can be defined and modeled according to Equation (6). Referred to as the movement step of rabbits, this parameter is a type of coefficient for their escape:
(6)J=21−rand0,1.


### 2.2. Hard Siege

In the HHO algorithm, every hawk or solution can directly move toward the rabbit and actually dive toward it. The following equation can be employed to model this kind of behavior:(7)Xt+1=Xrabbitt−E∆Xt.Figure3 shows the hunting behavior of the hard type in the HHO algorithm in which every hawk dives to an optimal solution or rabbit.Figure 3
The hard siege behavior in the HHO algorithm.


### 2.3. Soft Siege with Quick Dives

In the HHO algorithm, every hawk can gradually close in to a bait and move toward it over time. In this case, a hawk dives from a height and stays farther from the bait, moving slowly toward it by losing altitude. Equation (8) can be used as the soft siege mechanism to model this behavior, and Equation (9) can be used as the quick dive mechanism.
(8)Y=Xrabbitt−EJ.Xrabbitt−Xt,(9)Z=Y+S×LFD.In this equation,Y and Z show the position based on soft siege and position change based on quick dive, respectively, and LFDis a levy flight model showing the dimension position changes follow. Figure 4 shows the concept of this behavior.Figure 4
Soft siege and quick dive in the HHO algorithm.Based on the soft position change and quick dive in the HHO algorithm, there are two new positions which must be compared with the current position. Since the problem is to find the minimum, a position will be selected as the new position if it is a smaller minimum compared to others based on the following equation.(10)Xt+1YifFY<FZZifFZ<FY.


### 2.4. Quickly Dives into the Center of Gravity

In the HHO algorithm, every hawk can decide based on the assembly point of other hawks and determine their center of gravity. In this case, the movement is performed through the following equation [11]:
(11)Y=Xrabbitt−EJ.Xrabbitt−Xmt.Figure5 shows this behavior in a hawk’s movement through the average point. In fact, every hawk moves toward the bait through the average point of population and the most optimal position.Figure 5
Quick dive behavior through the center of gravity in the HHO.On the consecutive iteration of the HHO algorithm, the positions of hawks and those of the rabbit (or the current optimal solution) are iteratively updated. Finally, the position of the bait is extracted as the final solution in the final iteration. According to the tests and reviews, their proposed algorithm outperformed the genetic algorithm, particle swarm optimization (PSO), firefly algorithm, bat algorithm, biogeography-based optimization (BBO), cuckoo search, and differential evolution algorithm in accuracy.


## 2.1. Soft Siege

In the HHO algorithm, soft siege refers to the time when a hawk moves gradually toward a bait and searches around it. The following equations are employed to model this behavior to update the positions of hawks:(4)Xt+1=∆Xt−EJ.Xrabbitt−Xt,(5)∆Xt=Xrabbitt−Xt.In these equations,J is a random value ranging between zero and two. It can be defined and modeled according to Equation (6). Referred to as the movement step of rabbits, this parameter is a type of coefficient for their escape:
(6)J=21−rand0,1.


## 2.2. Hard Siege

In the HHO algorithm, every hawk or solution can directly move toward the rabbit and actually dive toward it. The following equation can be employed to model this kind of behavior:(7)Xt+1=Xrabbitt−E∆Xt.Figure3 shows the hunting behavior of the hard type in the HHO algorithm in which every hawk dives to an optimal solution or rabbit.Figure 3
The hard siege behavior in the HHO algorithm.


## 2.3. Soft Siege with Quick Dives

In the HHO algorithm, every hawk can gradually close in to a bait and move toward it over time. In this case, a hawk dives from a height and stays farther from the bait, moving slowly toward it by losing altitude. Equation (8) can be used as the soft siege mechanism to model this behavior, and Equation (9) can be used as the quick dive mechanism.
(8)Y=Xrabbitt−EJ.Xrabbitt−Xt,(9)Z=Y+S×LFD.In this equation,Y and Z show the position based on soft siege and position change based on quick dive, respectively, and LFDis a levy flight model showing the dimension position changes follow. Figure 4 shows the concept of this behavior.Figure 4
Soft siege and quick dive in the HHO algorithm.Based on the soft position change and quick dive in the HHO algorithm, there are two new positions which must be compared with the current position. Since the problem is to find the minimum, a position will be selected as the new position if it is a smaller minimum compared to others based on the following equation.(10)Xt+1YifFY<FZZifFZ<FY.


## 2.4. Quickly Dives into the Center of Gravity

In the HHO algorithm, every hawk can decide based on the assembly point of other hawks and determine their center of gravity. In this case, the movement is performed through the following equation [11]:
(11)Y=Xrabbitt−EJ.Xrabbitt−Xmt.Figure5 shows this behavior in a hawk’s movement through the average point. In fact, every hawk moves toward the bait through the average point of population and the most optimal position.Figure 5
Quick dive behavior through the center of gravity in the HHO.On the consecutive iteration of the HHO algorithm, the positions of hawks and those of the rabbit (or the current optimal solution) are iteratively updated. Finally, the position of the bait is extracted as the final solution in the final iteration. According to the tests and reviews, their proposed algorithm outperformed the genetic algorithm, particle swarm optimization (PSO), firefly algorithm, bat algorithm, biogeography-based optimization (BBO), cuckoo search, and differential evolution algorithm in accuracy.


## 3. FCM Clustering Algorithm

Clustering can be regarded as the most practical technique for data mining and pattern recognition. In this technique, data are inserted into a class of similar data. Then, a number of data are selected as the representatives of clusters, and the existing data are attributed to cluster centers based on similarity. In different clustering techniques, cluster centers are conventionally selected randomly in the first iteration. Gradually, these centers are updated by repeating the clustering algorithm. The optimal selection of cluster centers is an NP-hard problem, for which no definite methods have been proposed [12]. The accurate and optimal selection of cluster centers has a significant effect on the clustering quality. The more optimally these centers are selected, the lower the clustering error is. In the clustering technique, data are attributed to cluster centers based on their similarities; the clustering mechanism requires that the data inside a cluster have the highest similarity to each other. At the same time, the data of two different clusters should have the least similarity to each other. Figure 6 shows a case of unsupervised learning technique of clustering.Figure 6
Clustering technique for data classification and separation [13].The FCM clustering is an enhanced version of thek-means clustering algorithm, in which a piece of data can belong to several clusters. In this method, every piece of data has a fuzzy degree based on its similarity to cluster centers. This degree ranges between zero (the least possible similarity) and one (the most possible similarity). In this clustering technique, a c×n membership matrix is defined. It can be shown as U=uijc×n which stores the fuzzy degrees of all data based on their similarity to cluster centers. The sum of the fuzzy degrees of each piece of data at all cluster centers is one, and the fuzzy degree of each piece of data is a number between zero and one within the membership matrix. The target function of the fuzzy clustering algorithm is defined according to the following equation based on the membership function and Euclidean distance or other similarity criteria [14]:
(12)JmX,U,P=∑i=1c∑j=1nuijmdij2.In the FCM algorithm, a set of random cluster centers is first selected for clustering data. Then the membership matrix of the fuzzy algorithm is created. After that, the cluster centers are updated through the membership function, and the target function of the FCM clustering algorithm is determined. This function is expected to be minimized. Then the algorithm is repeated by updating the membership functions based on the new cluster centers until the value of the target function does not change. Finally, the resulting cluster centers are employed to develop a clustering of images or data. This data mining technique can be used for the diagnosis of MS, which is a progressive chronic disease of the central nervous system. MS harms the myelin layer which is tasked with insulating nerves and transferring information rapidly from the brain to the other parts of the body. Therefore, messages sent from the nervous system are transferred very slowly or blocked completely. As a result, MS causes various symptoms such as imbalance, fatigue, blurred sight, and numbness of the feet and hands. MS is the main cause of nontraumatic disability among adults and the most prevalent neurologically progressive disease among youth. Segmentation of brain MRIs is considered a practical method for diagnosing MS. Developing various segmentation methods, researchers attempt to distinguish between damaged areas of the brain from healthy areas. The segmentation of MS tissues or other brain tissues is an attempt at separating healthy tissues from damaged ones. Figure7 shows a segmentation case.Figure 7
Segmentation and detection of MS tissues [15].


## 4. Literature Review

In [16], the memory-based learning technology was employed to detect brain tumors in MRIs. In this study, it was decided to separate brain tumors from other brain tissues. A brain tumor tissue is a mass of brain tissue generated through the unnatural growth of cells. Today, it is necessary to automatically diagnose the brain tumor to decide on a robotic or swarm intelligence treatment. In this study, the proposed method focused on increasing the speed of brain tumor segmentation in sectional 2D images without improving the diagnosis accuracy. This memory-based learning method benefits from a specific information bank along with the histogram to identify a tumor quickly and accurately in a sectional image in two dimensions. It is necessary to reduce the time required to accurately compute tumor division in the 2D sectional images obtained from a 3D MRI so that the faster detection of the 3D tumor area will be possible without adversely affecting the diagnosis accuracy. According to the results, the proposed method decreased the calculation time to a great extent by eliminating the repetitive process of ordinary calculations.In [17], a metaheuristic method based on the crow search algorithm was used to improve the accuracy of the FCM algorithm. In this study, the crow search algorithm was integrated with the chaos theory and used along with the FCM algorithm to meet the important challenge of feature selection in medical diagnosis. In the proposed framework, known as the CFCSA algorithm, the crow search algorithm adopts a global optimization method to prevent the fuzzy algorithm from being trapped in local optimums. The target function of the FCM algorithm was used as a cost function for the crow search optimization algorithm based on the chaos theory. Their proposed algorithm was compared with the binary crow search algorithm, pheromone optimization algorithm, binary pheromone optimization algorithm, and bat algorithm. According to these results, the proposed algorithm outperformed all other algorithms in diagnosing diabetes, heart diseases, liver diseases, breast cancer, lung cancer, cardiotocography of liver disorders, hepatitis, and arrhythmia. It also proposed fewer errors.In [18], a division and segmentation technique was applied to 3D brain MRIs based on the FCM algorithm with an unsupervised learning approach. It was assumed that the input images were prone to noise and that the proposed method moderated the noise to a great extent. In the proposed method, the performance of neighbor-based membership is defined on the basis of the weighted correlation between neighbors in image pixels. For this purpose, different 2D cutoffs were created on the image, and then clustering was applied to the images based on those cutoffs. According to the accurate analysis of results, the 3D brain image division method and the FCM clustering mixed with unsupervised learning managed to detect areas of brain tumor to some extent in 3D images.In [19], an FCM-BBO method was introduced for image segmentation to enhance the accuracy of FCM clustering extensively in the segmentation of different images such as medical images. FCM clustering faces a serious challenge, i.e., the high dependence of accuracy on the selection of initial cluster centers in segmentation; therefore, it is difficult to find optimal cluster centers. In this study, the BBO algorithm was employed to introduce a new hybrid method for image segmentation. For this purpose, the researchers generated a random population of initial clustering solutions. Then an evolutionary algorithm was employed to search for optimal clustering solutions by updating the cluster centers in each iteration through a metaheuristic algorithm, based on which clustering was performed. The BBO algorithm outperforms other evolutionary and metaheuristic algorithms proposed in recent years in finding optimization problems. Therefore, it was integrated with the FCM to decrease clustering and image segmentation errors. According to the computational tests on a series of test images, the proposed method has a considerable advantage to the FCM algorithm; it produced fewer image segmentation errors than the FCM; likewise, the hybrid FCM algorithm produced much fewer errors than other metaheuristic algorithms such as artificial bee colony and particle swarm optimization.In [20], a threshold-based method was introduced through the water cycle algorithm (WCA) for the segmentation of colored images by using the concept of entropy. In fact, entropy makes the nonextensive information of an image adjustable through an entropy-based parameter. This concept was utilized in this study to find the threshold through the WCA, which is a new population-based metaheuristic algorithm based on water cycle and flows of rivers and streams toward the sea in the real world. This study is mainly characterized by benefiting from novel optimization techniques such as WCA, monarch butterfly optimization (MBO), grasshopper optimization algorithm, bat algorithm, and PSO for colored image segmentation. WCA differs from other optimization algorithms which have recently been developed as it can be used for multilevel thresholding of color images. It outperforms other algorithms in quality and convergence speed.In [21], an entropy thresholding method was employed with the enhanced PSO to set the threshold of images; entropy-based thresholding techniques are very popular and effective in image segmentation with many applications in medicine. Among different entropy-based techniques, the MCET method has drawn a great deal of attention in image segmentation because of its accuracy. Given the high time complexity of the MCET method for multilevel thresholding, the enhanced PSO was employed to meet this challenge; optimization techniques were employed to find the optimal multilevel threshold for the image to reduce the computational complexity. In this study, a temporal multiobjective PSO algorithm was utilized to propose a multilevel thresholding algorithm to optimally calculate MCETs. The problem of early convergence adversely affects the performance of the standard PSO; however, it was decided to enhance this algorithm first in this study and then use it for setting thresholds. The proposed technique was applied to a set of gray images in MATLAB, and the empirical results indicated that the optimal MCETs were generated faster at a higher convergence speed. This method was qualitatively and quantitatively compared with other optimization techniques such as the modified artificial bee colony, cuckoo search algorithm, firefly algorithm, particle swarm optimization, and genetic algorithm. Accordingly, the proposed method required a shorter time by CPU to generate the optimal threshold and produced fewer classification errors. In addition, it outperforms other methods in the signal-to-noise ratio and measurement of feature similarity index.In [22], the shrimp organization algorithm was used to propose a multithresholding method for images. In addition, the feeding mechanism of the shrimp optimization algorithm was employed to find the optimal Otsu thresholds. In their proposed method, each vector or solution is a set of thresholds, which is actually considered a shrimp, and thresholds are updated through three steps: feeding, random search, and attraction to a group or classes. According to the test results, this mechanism selects more accurate thresholds for Otsu than PSO and GA. Its runtime is also shorter than the other two algorithms.In [23], several different clustering algorithms such as FCM, kernel-based fuzzy clustering, spatial fuzzy clustering, and k-means clustering techniques were used for the segmentation of different brain tissues. Then their performances were compared. According to the results, fuzzy-based versions were less sensitive to noise than other abovementioned techniques, out of which the fuzzy algorithm outperformed others in the segmentation of brain MRIs.


## 5. Proposed Method

The FCM faces the following challenges in clustering information and data. These challenges can mostly be dealt with through smart methods such as HHO:(i)
Selecting cluster centers is based on mathematical computations in the FCM; cluster center selection is not smart; thus, clustering cannot be very accurate(ii)
The FCM tests only one membership matrix in every iteration; however, if several membership matrices are used simultaneously, the chance of finding optimal cluster centers generated from membership matrices will increase.Considering these two challenges, a metaheuristic technique such as HHO can be utilized to decrease the FCM errors. In this algorithm, it is possible to generate a series of membership matrices, every one of which is put into a hawk, and the optimal membership function should be selected when the HHO is applied to them with the minimum rate of optimal cluster centers by using the optimal values of membership functions in the FCM.


### 5.1. The Steps of the Proposed Method

Figure8 shows the steps of the proposed method for the segmentation of brain MRs by using the fuzzy-enhanced algorithm for the HHO.Figure 8
Steps of the proposed method for the detection of MS lesions.Using the above framework, the first image is preprocessed, and the noise is reduced. Then the segmentation is performed followed by evaluating via the threshold value to identify the brain tissue damaged by MS. Finally, the extracted brain tissue is compared with the manually extracted image of the brain for evaluation based on indicators of accuracy and similarity.


### 5.2. Improving FCM

In the proposed method, the HHO algorithm is employed to select the optimal values in the membership matrix. Unlike FCM, HHO updates and determines the fuzzy values of the membership matrix by using the existing mechanisms. Figure9 shows the mechanism of the proposed method for clustering the fuzzy algorithm through HHO.Figure 9
The framework of the fuzzy method integrated with the HHO algorithm.In the proposed method, the HHO is employed to reduce the fuzzy clustering errors. With the help of this algorithm, the edges of objects are identified in brain MRIs. This algorithm plays the following roles in improving fuzzy clustering:(i)
Finding the optimal membership matrix in the FCM(ii)
Using the optimal membership matrix in clustering to find the optimal cluster centers(iii)
Using the optimal cluster centers for fuzzy clustering and detecting MS lesions.In each iteration of the proposed method, there is a set of membership matrices, every one of which is considered a member of the HHO algorithm. Each of these membership matrices indicates a cluster evaluated by using the target function of the fuzzy clustering algorithm to determine their corresponding cluster centers. At each step of the proposed method, there is a membership matrix in the population of the HHO algorithm. From these matrices, the most optimal one with less errors in finding the optimal cluster is selected as the optimal membership matrix. The proposed method for improving the FCM through the HHO may consist of the following steps:(i)
A set of cluster centers is randomly created from data or images(ii)
The membership matrix corresponding to each cluster mode is generated(iii)
A membership matrix is regarded as a hawk or a member of the HHO population(iv)
The HHO algorithm and its movement operators are utilized to update the membership matrices, which are then employed to create new cluster centers in the next iterations(v)
The new cluster centers are evaluated by using the FCM evaluation function. Every membership matrix with the least possible error is regarded as the optimal membership matrix; this optimal matrix is the bait position in the HHO algorithm and is responsible for directing other membership matrices(vi)
The optimal membership matrix is used in the final iteration to find the cluster centers. This membership matrix can actually generate optimal cluster centers(vii)
Optimal cluster centers with the least possible error can be used for clustering, and then this algorithm can be used for image segmentation.


### 5.3. Formulating the Proposed Segmentation

In the proposed method, one image is first used as input. Then it is preprocessed. After that, parameters such as population size and iteration number are determined. A membership matrix is used as a member of the HHO population. The following equation shows this code:(13)HHOi=u1,1i⋯u1,ciu2,1i⋯u2,ci⋯un,1i⋯⋯⋯un,cin×c.In this equation, every membership matrix hasn rows, indicating the number of image pixels, and c columns, indicating the fuzzy degree of a pixel to cluster centers. Moreover, HHOi is a member of the Harris Hawks optimization algorithm and considers a solution or membership matrix. According to the following equation, every hawk can be regarded as a membership matrix of the FCM for image segmentation:
(14)HHOi=Un.ci.Each component of a membership matrix or a hawk can be fuzzy. According to the following equation, it can only be between zero and one:(15)0≤uij≤1.In this equation,i and j show the pixel number of an MRI and a cluster center in the image, respectively. Every hawk solution is a membership matrix. According to Equation (16), the sum of rows is one, which means the sum of the fuzzy degrees of a pixel to all cluster centers is equal to one:
(16)∑j=1cuij=1.In this equation,i is the number of a pixel in an MRI, and j is the number of cluster centers, which is assumed as c here. In the proposed method or the HHO algorithm, which is integrated with the FCM, it is necessary to generate an initial population of cluster centers. Then membership matrices are also generated. A number of membership matrices are generated to meet the conditions of the following equation:
(17)Pop=Un.c1,Un.c2,⋯,Un.cn.In this equation,Pop is the initial population of membership matrices, which are employed to determine the cluster centers, and n is the number of members in this population. These membership matrices are used to update the cluster centers in the FCM according to the following equation:
(18)ci=∑k=1nμikmIk∑k=1nμikm.In each membership matrix, the light intensity of a pixel is shown bylk, and every membership matrix or member of the HHO algorithm can be updated by using the updated cluster centers and positions of membership matrices such as the following equation:
(19)Si=∑k=1n∑i=1cuikmsimIk,ci,where simIk,ci is the similarity of a pixel with a light intensity of lk to a cluster center ci. If the light intensity difference is minimized, then the similarity increases. In the proposed method, the goal is to minimize this target function, which is minimized when the membership matrix is selected optimally. In this case, the cluster centers are optimized. In other words, the minimization of this function results in a more accurate segmentation process in the FCM algorithm. In each step, the HHO algorithm and relevant equations are used to update every membership matrix. For instance, the soft siege behavior and hard siege behavior are executed on membership matrices to update them in accordance with the following equations, respectively:
(20)HHOt+1=HHO∗−HHOt−EJ.HHO∗−HHOt,(21)HHOt+1=HHO∗−EHHO∗−HHOt.In these equations,HHOt is a membership matrix at iteration t, and HHOt+1 is the updated version of the membership matrix while HHO∗ is the optimal membership matrix, based on which cluster centers are generated for segmentation.


### 5.4. Binarization in the Proposed Method

The segmentation output of the proposed method is a grayscale image with 256 light intensities and needs to be binarized. For binarization, a light intensity threshold between 0 and 255 can be selected to binarize the segmentation image like the following equation:(22)img=1ifimgi,j≥Threshold0ifimgi,j<Threshold,where MRI is a segmented image and the output of the HHO segmentation and FCM algorithms, while B is a binary image with only two light intensities. In the proposed method, the serious challenge is to find the appropriate threshold, which can be calculated through the Otsu algorithm. The light intensity histogram of image segmentation can be used for finding the Otsu threshold. In MATLAB, there is a command (multithresh) for this purpose. The tumor area can be extracted through image binarization. Then it can be compared with the real area.


## 5.1. The Steps of the Proposed Method

Figure8 shows the steps of the proposed method for the segmentation of brain MRs by using the fuzzy-enhanced algorithm for the HHO.Figure 8
Steps of the proposed method for the detection of MS lesions.Using the above framework, the first image is preprocessed, and the noise is reduced. Then the segmentation is performed followed by evaluating via the threshold value to identify the brain tissue damaged by MS. Finally, the extracted brain tissue is compared with the manually extracted image of the brain for evaluation based on indicators of accuracy and similarity.


## 5.2. Improving FCM

In the proposed method, the HHO algorithm is employed to select the optimal values in the membership matrix. Unlike FCM, HHO updates and determines the fuzzy values of the membership matrix by using the existing mechanisms. Figure9 shows the mechanism of the proposed method for clustering the fuzzy algorithm through HHO.Figure 9
The framework of the fuzzy method integrated with the HHO algorithm.In the proposed method, the HHO is employed to reduce the fuzzy clustering errors. With the help of this algorithm, the edges of objects are identified in brain MRIs. This algorithm plays the following roles in improving fuzzy clustering:(i)
Finding the optimal membership matrix in the FCM(ii)
Using the optimal membership matrix in clustering to find the optimal cluster centers(iii)
Using the optimal cluster centers for fuzzy clustering and detecting MS lesions.In each iteration of the proposed method, there is a set of membership matrices, every one of which is considered a member of the HHO algorithm. Each of these membership matrices indicates a cluster evaluated by using the target function of the fuzzy clustering algorithm to determine their corresponding cluster centers. At each step of the proposed method, there is a membership matrix in the population of the HHO algorithm. From these matrices, the most optimal one with less errors in finding the optimal cluster is selected as the optimal membership matrix. The proposed method for improving the FCM through the HHO may consist of the following steps:(i)
A set of cluster centers is randomly created from data or images(ii)
The membership matrix corresponding to each cluster mode is generated(iii)
A membership matrix is regarded as a hawk or a member of the HHO population(iv)
The HHO algorithm and its movement operators are utilized to update the membership matrices, which are then employed to create new cluster centers in the next iterations(v)
The new cluster centers are evaluated by using the FCM evaluation function. Every membership matrix with the least possible error is regarded as the optimal membership matrix; this optimal matrix is the bait position in the HHO algorithm and is responsible for directing other membership matrices(vi)
The optimal membership matrix is used in the final iteration to find the cluster centers. This membership matrix can actually generate optimal cluster centers(vii)
Optimal cluster centers with the least possible error can be used for clustering, and then this algorithm can be used for image segmentation.


## 5.3. Formulating the Proposed Segmentation

In the proposed method, one image is first used as input. Then it is preprocessed. After that, parameters such as population size and iteration number are determined. A membership matrix is used as a member of the HHO population. The following equation shows this code:(13)HHOi=u1,1i⋯u1,ciu2,1i⋯u2,ci⋯un,1i⋯⋯⋯un,cin×c.In this equation, every membership matrix hasn rows, indicating the number of image pixels, and c columns, indicating the fuzzy degree of a pixel to cluster centers. Moreover, HHOi is a member of the Harris Hawks optimization algorithm and considers a solution or membership matrix. According to the following equation, every hawk can be regarded as a membership matrix of the FCM for image segmentation:
(14)HHOi=Un.ci.Each component of a membership matrix or a hawk can be fuzzy. According to the following equation, it can only be between zero and one:(15)0≤uij≤1.In this equation,i and j show the pixel number of an MRI and a cluster center in the image, respectively. Every hawk solution is a membership matrix. According to Equation (16), the sum of rows is one, which means the sum of the fuzzy degrees of a pixel to all cluster centers is equal to one:
(16)∑j=1cuij=1.In this equation,i is the number of a pixel in an MRI, and j is the number of cluster centers, which is assumed as c here. In the proposed method or the HHO algorithm, which is integrated with the FCM, it is necessary to generate an initial population of cluster centers. Then membership matrices are also generated. A number of membership matrices are generated to meet the conditions of the following equation:
(17)Pop=Un.c1,Un.c2,⋯,Un.cn.In this equation,Pop is the initial population of membership matrices, which are employed to determine the cluster centers, and n is the number of members in this population. These membership matrices are used to update the cluster centers in the FCM according to the following equation:
(18)ci=∑k=1nμikmIk∑k=1nμikm.In each membership matrix, the light intensity of a pixel is shown bylk, and every membership matrix or member of the HHO algorithm can be updated by using the updated cluster centers and positions of membership matrices such as the following equation:
(19)Si=∑k=1n∑i=1cuikmsimIk,ci,where simIk,ci is the similarity of a pixel with a light intensity of lk to a cluster center ci. If the light intensity difference is minimized, then the similarity increases. In the proposed method, the goal is to minimize this target function, which is minimized when the membership matrix is selected optimally. In this case, the cluster centers are optimized. In other words, the minimization of this function results in a more accurate segmentation process in the FCM algorithm. In each step, the HHO algorithm and relevant equations are used to update every membership matrix. For instance, the soft siege behavior and hard siege behavior are executed on membership matrices to update them in accordance with the following equations, respectively:
(20)HHOt+1=HHO∗−HHOt−EJ.HHO∗−HHOt,(21)HHOt+1=HHO∗−EHHO∗−HHOt.In these equations,HHOt is a membership matrix at iteration t, and HHOt+1 is the updated version of the membership matrix while HHO∗ is the optimal membership matrix, based on which cluster centers are generated for segmentation.


## 5.4. Binarization in the Proposed Method

The segmentation output of the proposed method is a grayscale image with 256 light intensities and needs to be binarized. For binarization, a light intensity threshold between 0 and 255 can be selected to binarize the segmentation image like the following equation:(22)img=1ifimgi,j≥Threshold0ifimgi,j<Threshold,where MRI is a segmented image and the output of the HHO segmentation and FCM algorithms, while B is a binary image with only two light intensities. In the proposed method, the serious challenge is to find the appropriate threshold, which can be calculated through the Otsu algorithm. The light intensity histogram of image segmentation can be used for finding the Otsu threshold. In MATLAB, there is a command (multithresh) for this purpose. The tumor area can be extracted through image binarization. Then it can be compared with the real area.


## 6. Implementation and Analysis

The proposed method was evaluated on data set that explained in [15], which consists of T1-weighted, T2-weighted, and proton density (PD) MRI images. This dataset contains 10 cases and the proposed method tested for each case separately. For implementing of the proposed method, MATLAB R2019a version is used with Intel core i7 6 GHz processor and 4 GB RAM with Windows 10 operating system.A number of grayscale MRIs of the brain and MS were used to evaluate the proposed algorithm. These images included the areas of the brain affected by MS. The proposed method was employed to detect and extract the edges of these areas and compare them with manual areas, showing the areas with damaged brain tissues which were extracted by a physician or researcher from brain MRIs. First, the implementation and simulation parameters were adjusted in MATLAB. Then the input images were preprocessed, and their noise was reduced through a filter such as the median. Then the proposed segmentation method was applied to them to calculate the average values of indicators such as accuracy and similarity for all images. After that, the outputs were determined and compared with other methods. Figure10 shows three output samples of the proposed method for the diagnosis of MS on brain MRIs. In this test, it was decided to use three clusters like the previous test. The HHO population size and iteration were 10 and 50, respectively. The dimensions of the grayscale images were 512×512 pixels. Other parameters of the HHO algorithm were considered in the same way as the original paper. First, the image was preprocessed to eliminate possible noise. Then the brightness level was improved, and the image was segmented. After binarization of the image, MS lesions appeared as white stains on the binary image.Figure 10
Various examples of segmentation failure: (a) original MRI image, (b) ground truth image, (c) proposed method, and (d) result of the proposed method (green) and ground truth (red).
(a)(b)(c)(d)Different indices can be employed to evaluate the proposed algorithm. The most famous indices include similarity index (SI), accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity, for every one of which it is necessary to calculate initial indices such as true positive (TP), true negative (TN), false positive (FP), and false negative (FN). Then SI, accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity can be obtained from the following equations [24–29]:
(23)SI=2×TP2×TP+FP+FN,(24)Accuracy=TP+TNTP+TN+FP+FN,(25)Sensitivity=TPTP+FN,(26)Specificity=TNTN+FP.The proposed indices are of the classification type and range between zero and one. If the value of an index is one, it shows the proper quality of classification. If it is expressed by percentage, the proximity to %100 shows the accuracy of the proposed method in the segmentation and extraction of MS areas. TP, TN, FP, and FN have different meanings and count the true or false pixels pertaining to MS tissue or healthy tissue [25–27]. Table 1 shows the meanings of these indices.Table 1
Meanings of TP, TN, FP, and FN in evaluating the proposed method.
CriterionDefinitionTPMS pixel that are correctly detectedTNHealthy pixels correctly detected as healthy tissuesFPPixels incorrectly detected as MS pixelsFNMS pixels incorrectly detected as healthy pixelsTo evaluate the proposed method, it can be analyzed based on similarity, accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. For this purpose, 35 images were used. Figure11 shows the average values of these indicators.Figure 11
The average values for similarity, accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the proposed method for MS diagnosis.According to the test results, it is fair to state that the similarity, accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity indicators of the proposed method were 94.28%, 94.23%, 89.56%, and 93.34%, respectively. Therefore, the extracted area resembled the manually detected area. Sensitivity shows what percentage of MS pixels were detected correctly, and specificity indicates what percentage of healthy pixels were detected correctly in MS. The test results were analyzed in MATLAB for the detection of MS lesions with the following findings:(i)
The proposed method properly detected the MS area and distinguished it from brain tissue(ii)
The proposed method properly analyzed the damaged areas of the brain using three clusters.The proposed method can be evaluated with different indices. In this study, accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity were used to compare the FCM+HHO algorithm with FCM+ACO,k-NN, RBF+k-NN, and PSO+SVM algorithms. Figures 12–14 show the comparison results for accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity, respectively. Accordingly, the proposed method was more accurate than other techniques.Figure 12
Comparison of accuracy of the proposed method with other methods.Figure 13
Comparison of sensitivity of the proposed method with other methods.Figure 14
Comparison of specificity of the proposed method with other methods.Accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity indices were reported in percentage for comparison. As indicated, the proposed method outperforms FCM+ACO,k-NN, RBF+k-NN, and PSO+SVM techniques by making smart use of HHO, which optimized the membership matrices in the FCM. Therefore, the cluster centers of the FCM algorithm were selected optimally to decrease the clustering and segmentation errors.


## 7. Conclusion and Suggestions

In this paper, FCM algorithm was integrated with HHO algorithm to extract MS lesions and decrease segmentation error. In the proposed method, cluster centers were selected through the HHO algorithm for the diagnosis of MS lesions. The membership matrices were regarded as the population of the HHO algorithm. Based on those matrices, the optimal cluster centers were obtained; the HHO algorithm was responsible for selecting the optimal membership matrix, based on which optimal cluster centers were selected to accurately perform segmentation and detect MS lesions. Meanwhile, the Otsu thresholding or manual thresholding were utilized for the binarization of images and outputting them. In the preprocessing phase, the median noise reduction filter outperformed the average noise reduction filter and better maintained the quality of image and edges. The results of applying the proposed method on medical images showed that the use of three cluster centers produces better results in the segmentation of brain MRIs for MS diagnosis. Moreover, the comparison and evaluation results show that the proposed method outperforms the FCM+ACO,k-NN, RBF+k-NN, and PSO+SVM techniques in accuracy and sensitivity. For future research, our recommendations include using 3D images, proposing an algorithm for the analysis of 3D images, using color images for a more accurate diagnosis of MS, and further developing the proposed method.



---

*Source: 3248834-2021-12-27.xml*