Effect of Spatial, Intensity, and Hybrid Augmentation on Kidney CT Image Classification

Ardha Ardhana Putra Agustavada; Aji Prasetya Wibawa; Dafa Fadhilah Hilmi; Abdullah Sholum; Felix Andika Dwiyanto

doi:10.56705/ijodas.v7i2.443

Authors

Ardha Ardhana Putra Agustavada Universitas Negeri Malang
Aji Prasetya Wibawa Universitas Negeri Malang
Dafa Fadhilah Hilmi Universitas Negeri Malang
Abdullah Sholum Universitas Negeri Malang
Felix Andika Dwiyanto AGH University of Krak´ow

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.56705/ijodas.v7i2.443

Keywords:

Kidney CT Images, Data Augmentation, Intensity Augmentation, Deep Learning, Medical Image Classification, Learning Behavior Analysis

Abstract

Kidney diseases remain a significant global health challenge, and computed tomography (CT) plays an important role in supporting their diagnosis through detailed visualization of renal structures. In deep learning-based medical image classification, data augmentation is commonly employed to mitigate the limitations of small training datasets; nevertheless, the effects of distinct augmentation strategies on image characteristics and learning behavior across architectures remain insufficiently explored. This study investigates the impact of spatial, intensity, and hybrid augmentation on kidney CT image classification using CNN, MobileNetV2, and EfficientNet-B0 architectures. A stratified data split was adopted, and all experiments were repeated using three random seeds (1, 42, and 123), with results reported as mean ± standard deviation. Four training scenarios (baseline, spatial, intensity, and hybrid augmentation) were evaluated using accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, and Area Under the Curve (AUC). The baseline configuration achieved the highest overall performance, reaching mean accuracies of 99.96 ± 0.04%, 98.32 ± 0.06%, and 94.06 ± 0.58% for CNN, MobileNetV2, and EfficientNet-B0, respectively. Among the augmentation strategies, intensity augmentation achieved the highest performance only for CNN while consistently exhibiting smaller performance degradation relative to the baseline and more stable convergence than the spatial and hybrid augmentation approaches. The consistently high baseline performance, particularly for CNN, underscores the importance of rigorous validation on public medical imaging datasets. These findings indicate that preserving anatomically relevant image characteristics is more beneficial than indiscriminately increasing data diversity. Therefore, while the baseline remained the best overall training strategy, intensity augmentation was the most effective augmentation approach

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1] A. Francis et al., “Chronic kidney disease and the global public health agenda: an international consensus,” Nat. Rev. Nephrol., vol. 20, no. 7, pp. 473–485, Jul. 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41581-024-00820-6.

[2] R. Setyati et al., “The Importance of Early Detection in Disease Management,” Journal of World Future Medicine, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 51–63, 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.55849/health.v2i1.692.

[3] S. S. R. Vulasala et al., “Computed tomography of renal emergencies: A comprehensive diagnostic guide for radiology residents,” World J. Nephrol., vol. 15, no. 1, Mar. 2026, doi: https://doi.org/10.5527/wjn.v15.i1.114185.

[4] I. D. Mienye, T. G. Swart, G. Obaido, M. Jordan, and P. Ilono, “Deep Convolutional Neural Networks in Medical Image Analysis: A Review,” Information, vol. 16, no. 3, p. 195, Mar. 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/info16030195.

[5] H. E. Kim, A. Cosa-Linan, N. Santhanam, M. Jannesari, M. E. Maros, and T. Ganslandt, “Transfer learning for medical image classification: a literature review,” BMC Med. Imaging, vol. 22, no. 1, p. 69, Dec. 2022, doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12880-022-00793-7.

[6] H. Khachnaoui, B. Chikhaoui, N. Khlifa, and R. Mabrouk, “Enhanced Parkinson’s Disease Diagnosis Through Convolutional Neural Network Models Applied to SPECT DaTSCAN Images,” IEEE Access, vol. 11, pp. 91157–91172, 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3308075.

[7] G. Tummalapalli, O. Gurrapu, K. N. Kumar, J. Venkata Suman, A. V. Rao, and M. Prabhu, “Deep Learning Approaches for Enhancing Image Classification Accuracy in Medical Imaging,” in 2025 Devices for Integrated Circuit (DevIC), IEEE, Apr. 2025, pp. 16–21. doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/DevIC63749.2025.11012289.

[8] J. C. L. Chow, “Machine learning in cancer imaging for enhanced precision in diagnosis and therapy,” Discover Computing, vol. 29, no. 1, p. 186, Mar. 2026, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10791-026-10078-0.

[9] F. Jahan, A. S. Reza, M. K. Morol, D. Nandi, Md. J. Hossen, and M. Rahman, “Explainable deep learning for early diagnosis of chronic kidney disease from CT images in Bangladeshi patients,” Sci. Rep., vol. 16, no. 1, p. 14819, Mar. 2026, doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-42654-1.

[10] Y. Dang et al., “Data Augmentation for Sequential Recommendation: A Survey,” IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng., vol. 38, no. 8, pp. 4938–4957, Aug. 2026, doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/TKDE.2026.3692969.

[11] N. Kozah, F. Dornaika, J. Charafeddine, and J. El Jaam, “Data Augmentation Techniques for Medical Image Segmentation – A Review,” in 2024 International Conference on Computer and Applications (ICCA), IEEE, Dec. 2024, pp. 1–8. doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCA62237.2024.10927851.

[12] F. Garcea, A. Serra, F. Lamberti, and L. Morra, “Data augmentation for medical imaging: A systematic literature review,” Comput. Biol. Med., vol. 152, p. 106391, Jan. 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compbiomed.2022.106391.

[13] K. Rais, M. Amroune, M. Y. Haouam, A. Benmachiche, and S. Abid, “Dynamic feature context activation and data augmentation for enhanced medical image segmentation,” Multimed. Tools Appl., vol. 85, no. 2, p. 131, Feb. 2026, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-026-21296-5.

[14] J. Majidpour and H. Beitollahi, “A Comprehensive Examination of Machine Learning and Deep Learning Approaches for Breast Cancer Detection, Classification, Segmentation, Augmentation, and Feature Selection,” Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 1913–1944, Mar. 2026, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11831-025-10359-9.

[15] P. Dabove, M. Daud, and L. Olivotto, “Revolutionizing urban mapping: deep learning and data fusion strategies for accurate building footprint segmentation,” Sci. Rep., vol. 14, no. 1, p. 13510, Jun. 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-64231-0.

[16] D. T. Pham, T. V. Tran, X. Zhu, and H. N. Pham, “Optimising deep learning for building extraction: Dataset efficiency and model backbones under data constraints,” Remote Sens. Appl., vol. 41, p. 101876, Jan. 2026, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rsase.2026.101876.

[17] M. T. R et al., “Transformative Breast Cancer Diagnosis using CNNs with Optimized ReduceLROnPlateau and Early Stopping Enhancements,” International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems, vol. 17, no. 1, p. 14, Jan. 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s44196-023-00397-1.

[18] S. M. Rayavarapu, T. S. Prasanthi, S. R. Gottapu, and A. Singam, “A Comprehensive Overview on Data Augmentation Techniques for Medical Images,” in 2024 5th International Conference on Electronics and Sustainable Communication Systems (ICESC), IEEE, Aug. 2024, pp. 1324–1329. doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICESC60852.2024.10690109.

[19] T. Islam, Md. S. Hafiz, J. R. Jim, Md. M. Kabir, and M. F. Mridha, “A systematic review of deep learning data augmentation in medical imaging: Recent advances and future research directions,” Healthcare Analytics, vol. 5, p. 100340, Jun. 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.health.2024.100340.

[20] S. T. Marc, R. Belavkin, D. Windridge, and X. Gao, “An Evolutionary Approach to Automated Class-Specific Data Augmentation for Image Classification,” 2024, pp. 170–185. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-50320-7_12.

[21] R. Jain, R. Sharma, D. Tiwari, K. Joshi, and V. Jain, “Enhanced Classification of Intel Images Using Refined EfficientNet and MobileNetV2 Frameworks,” in 2023 4th International Conference on Intelligent Technologies (CONIT), IEEE, Jun. 2024, pp. 1–4. doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/CONIT61985.2024.10627673.

[22] A. Tilevik, “Classification and Performance Metrics,” in Multivariate Statistics and Machine Learning in R For Beginners, Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland, 2025, pp. 147–170. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-032-01851-9_10.

[23] Y. Xia and J. Sun, “Area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve (AUC-ROC),” in Machine Learning for Microbiome Statistics, Boca Raton: Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2026, pp. 504–519. doi: https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003610281-17.

[24] O. T. Turan, M. Loog, and D. M. J. Tax, “Generalization performance distributions along learning curves,” Pattern Recognit. Lett., vol. 201, pp. 29–36, Mar. 2026, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patrec.2026.01.003.

[25] J. Zhu, T. Ma, J. Li, C. Zeng, Q. Fu, and D. Jing, “ETD-Det: Oriented Object Detection With Spectral Diffusion Encoding and Extended-Gaussian Decoding,” IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, vol. 64, pp. 1–16, 2026, doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2026.3663195.

[26] S. Krishnendu and M. Biradar, “Enhancing diagnostic information in abdominal computed tomography (CT) images through optimized image enhancement techniques,” Phys. Eng. Sci. Med., vol. 49, no. 1, pp. 475–487, Mar. 2026, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13246-025-01679-y.