A Comparative Evaluation of Pre-trained Convolutional Neural Networks for Melanoma Detection — Paper

Abstract

Early diagnosis of melanoma is critical for improving patient survival rates. However, accurately distinguishing melanoma from other skin lesions remains a significant clinical challenge due to the high visual similarity among lesion types and variability in image acquisition conditions. Artificial intelligence, particularly machine learning, has emerged as a promising tool to support dermatological diagnosis by automating feature extraction from medical images. Among the available approaches, convolutional neural networks (CNNs) have demonstrated strong performance in image classification tasks, making them well-suited for analyzing both dermatoscopic and histopathological images, given their ability to capture hierarchical visual patterns relevant to lesion characterization. Nevertheless, despite numerous pre-trained CNN architectures having been proposed, selecting the most appropriate one for a given imaging modality remains an open challenge. In this study, we evaluate pre-trained convolutional neural networks (CNNs) for skin lesion classification using dermatoscopic and histopathological image datasets. Experiments were conducted on the HAM10000, ISIC 2018, and CR-AI4SkIN datasets, evaluating the ResNet50, VGG16, VGG19, MobileNet, and InceptionV3 architectures under the same training protocol. The experimental evaluation showed that the models achieved accuracies ranging from 71% (InceptionV3 on ISIC 2018) to 84% (ResNet50 on HAM10000) on dermatoscopic images. For histopathological images, accuracies ranged from 72% (VGG19) to 83% (ResNet50) on the CR-AI4SkIN dataset. The results demonstrate that model performance differs between dermatoscopic and histopathological image modalities, showing that architectures exhibiting similar performance on dermatoscopic images exhibit different performance on histopathological data.

Authors 5

Wagner Moreno Schmitz, Marco Antonio de Castro Barbosa, Thiago Magalh\~aes Amaral, Dalcimar Casanova, Jefferson Tales Oliva

Specification

Official page: arxiv.org/abs/2609.11550
Source:arXiv (Atom API + RSS)T1observed 2 h agohigh
Arxiv announce type: new
Source:arXiv (Atom API + RSS)T1observed 2 h agohigh
arXiv id: 2609.11550
Source:arXiv (Atom API + RSS)T1observed 2 h agohigh
Categories: cs.CV, cs.AI
Source:arXiv (Atom API + RSS)T1observed 2 h agohigh
PDF: arxiv.org/pdf/2609.11550
Source:arXiv (Atom API + RSS)T1observed 2 h agohigh
Primary category: cs.CV
Source:arXiv (Atom API + RSS)T1observed 2 h agohigh
Published: 11 Sept 2026
Source:arXiv (Atom API + RSS)T1observed 2 h agohigh

Each value shows its source, tier and observation time. Conflicting claims are kept side by side and flagged — never averaged. How AI Atlas records facts →

Provenance

Attributed facts

9

Source tiers

T19

Freshest observation

2 h ago

Conflicts

None

No models linked to this paper yet.

Authors: Wagner Moreno Schmitz, Marco Antonio de Castro Barbosa, Thiago Magalh\~aes Amaral

As of

Rewind the record: see this entity's attributes exactly as AI Atlas knew them on a given day.

Claim history · Categories

1 claims · 1 propertiesShow all properties

Categoriescategories1

Claim history for Categories
Value	Valid from → to	Status	Source	Confidence	Extractor
cs.CV, cs.AI	11 Sept 2026 21:03 UTC → current	current	arXiv (Atom API + RSS)T1	high	deterministic

Claims are temporal and append-only: a new observation closes the previous claim (valid_to) instead of overwriting it. Conflicting claims from different sources are kept side by side and flagged — never averaged. Methodology →

11 Sept 2026
New paperPaperA Comparative Evaluation of Pre-trained Convolutional Neural Networks for Melanoma Detection
New paper: A Comparative Evaluation of Pre-trained Convolutional Neural Networks for Melanoma Detection
arxiv
rss.arxiv.org

Full timeline →

Source documents
Source	Document	Type	Tier	Last observed	Snapshots
arXiv (Atom API + RSS)	rss.arxiv.org/rss/cs.CV	feed	T1· Official	2 h ago	1

Tier 1 = official/primary, 2 = quality secondary, 3 = community, 4 = unverified. Every snapshot is archived; see all sources and the methodology.