Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Objective Brain tumor classification based on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) plays a critical role in clinical diagnosis, yet it remains challenging due to high intra-class variability, inter-class similarity, and limited annotated data. To address these challenges, this study proposes a gated hybrid convolutional neural network (CNN)–transformer architecture (GHCT-Net) that effectively integrates local and global feature representations for robust brain tumor classification in data-limited medical imaging scenarios. Methods The proposed framework combines a ConvNeXt-based convolutional branch for fine-grained spatial feature extraction with a Swin Transformer branch for modeling long-range contextual dependencies. A gate-based fusion mechanism is introduced to adaptively balance the contribution of each feature stream. Additionally, a conditional deep convolutional generative adversarial network (cDCGAN) is employed to generate class-consistent synthetic MRI samples to mitigate data scarcity. The model was evaluated on a public dataset of 7023 MRI images across four classes (glioma, meningioma, pituitary tumor, and no tumor) under three training scenarios: original, traditionally augmented, and GAN-augmented datasets. Results The results demonstrate that the GHCT-Net achieves superior performance compared to state-of-the-art CNN and Transformer architectures, reaching a classification accuracy of 98.39% on the GAN-augmented dataset. Quantitative analysis, along with confusion matrices, t‑distributed stochastic neighbor embedding (t-SNE) visualizations, and gradient-weighted class activation mapping (Grad-CAM) interpretability studies, confirms that the model successfully learns discriminative and clinically relevant features. Conclusion Combining a gated hybrid CNN–transformer architecture with GAN-based data augmentation provides a highly effective and robust solution for brain tumor classification, particularly in scenarios constrained by limited medical imaging data.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Örenç et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: