Beatriz A Bosques-Palomo

Jorge Alberto Garza-Abdala, Gerardo Alejandro Fumagal-González, Beatriz A. Bosques-Palomo et al.

Early diagnosis of breast cancer is crucial for improving survival rates. Radiomics and deep learning (DL) have shown significant potential in assisting radiologists with early cancer detection. This paper aims to critically assess the performance of radiomics, DL, and ensemble techniques in detecting cancer from screening mammograms. Two independent datasets were used: the RSNA 2023 Breast Cancer Detection Challenge (11,913 patients) and a Mexican cohort from the TecSalud dataset (19,400 patients). The ConvNeXtV1-small DL model was trained on the RSNA dataset and validated on the TecSalud dataset, while radiomics models were developed using the TecSalud dataset and validated with a leave-one-year-out approach. The ensemble method consistently combined and calibrated predictions using the same methodology. Results showed that the ensemble approach achieved the highest area under the curve (AUC) of 0.87, compared to 0.83 for ConvNeXtV1-small and 0.80 for radiomics. In conclusion, ensemble methods combining DL and radiomics predictions significantly enhance breast cancer diagnosis from mammograms.

Juan P. Licona-Luque, Beatriz A. Bosques-Palomo, Nezih Nieto-Gutiérrez et al.

Python dominates AI development, yet the numerical work behind frameworks like PyTorch and NumPy is executed in C, C++, or Rust. When a developer must implement an algorithm without such libraries -- because none exists, the target is resource-constrained, or a new system is being built -- which language should they choose? This paper answers that question empirically. Five algorithms covering data mining (k-means), machine learning (k-NN), neural networks (MLP with backpropagation), computational intelligence (genetic algorithm), and fuzzy systems (Mamdani inference) are implemented from scratch in Python, C, C++, Rust, Go, and Julia. All implementations share a common pseudo-random generator, consume identical inputs, and produce bit-identical outputs, so every measured difference reflects the language rather than the computation. Three performance tiers emerge: C and C++ are effectively tied; Rust trails them by 9% (geometric mean); Julia runs 3.3x slower than C and Go 5.0x; Python sits at 315x. Memory tells a different story -- Julia's JIT runtime carries a fixed ~224 MiB footprint regardless of workload, while C, C++, and Rust stay below 6 MiB. Crucially, rankings are not stable: Go's slowdown swings from 2.6x on k-NN to 8.0x on k-means, showing that workload characteristics can shift a language's position by a full tier. The results provide concrete, per-workload guidance for choosing an implementation language in AI systems.