YOLOv8-Based Automatic Lesion Detection in Breast Ultrasound Images: A Reproducible Evaluation on a Small and Imbalanced Dataset
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56158/jcosml.2026.1.1.2Keywords:
Breast ultrasound, Object detection, YOLOv8, Computer-aided diagnosis, Class imbalance, Deep learningAbstract
Early detection is among the strongest determinants of survival in breast cancer, and ultrasound imaging is a routine component of the diagnostic pathway, particularly for patients with dense breast tissue. This study applies YOLOv8n, a lightweight single-stage object detector, to the task of localising lesions in breast ultrasound images and separating benign from malignant findings. Pixel-level lesion masks from the 780 images of the publicly available Breast Ultrasound Images (BUSI) dataset were converted into axis-aligned bounding boxes by external contour analysis, while lesion-free images were retained as unlabelled negative examples. Images were partitioned class-wise into training, validation and test subsets in a 70/15/15 ratio, and class-specific offline augmentation was applied to the training subset only, which brought the numbers of benign and malignant training instances to approximately the same level (614 versus 592). The model was trained for 50 epochs at an input resolution of 640×640. On the test subset, which was used neither for training nor for model selection, the mean average precision at an intersection-over-union threshold of 0.50 (mAP@50) was 0.737 and mAP@50–95 was 0.506. Class-wise mAP@50 was 0.817 for benign and 0.656 for malignant lesions. The findings indicate that a lightweight single-stage detector can reach a reasonable localisation performance on a small ultrasound dataset, but that performance on the malignant class — the clinically decisive one — is not yet adequate for decision-support use. The contribution of this work is not a claim of high accuracy but a reproducible account of every step from data preparation to evaluation, together with an explicit statement of the limitations of the approach.
References
[1] F. Bray, M. Laversanne, H. Sung, J. Ferlay, R. L. Siegel, I. Soerjomataram, and A. Jemal, “Global cancer statistics 2022: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries,” CA Cancer J. Clin., vol. 74, no. 3, pp. 229–263, 2024, doi: 10.3322/caac.21834.
[2] G. Litjens, T. Kooi, B. E. Bejnordi, A. A. A. Setio, F. Ciompi, M. Ghafoorian, J. A. W. M. van der Laak, B. van Ginneken, and C. I. Sánchez, “A survey on deep learning in medical image analysis,” Med. Image Anal., vol. 42, pp. 60–88, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.media.2017.07.005.
[3] J. Redmon, S. Divvala, R. Girshick, and A. Farhadi, “You only look once: Unified, real-time object detection,” in Proc. IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recognit. (CVPR), Las Vegas, NV, USA, 2016, pp. 779–788, doi: 10.1109/CVPR.2016.91.
[4] J. Terven, D.-M. Córdova-Esparza, and J.-A. Romero-González, “A comprehensive review of YOLO architectures in computer vision: From YOLOv1 to YOLOv8 and YOLO-NAS,” Mach. Learn. Knowl. Extr., vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 1680–1716, 2023, doi: 10.3390/make5040083.
[5] G. Jocher, A. Chaurasia, and J. Qiu, “Ultralytics YOLOv8,” software version 8.4.71, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://github.com/ultralytics/ultralytics
[6] W. Al-Dhabyani, M. Gomaa, H. Khaled, and A. Fahmy, “Dataset of breast ultrasound images,” Data Brief, vol. 28, art. no. 104863, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.dib.2019.104863.
[7] A. Pawłowska, P. Karwat, and N. Żołek, “Letter to the editor. Re: ‘Dataset of breast ultrasound images by W. Al-Dhabyani, M. Gomaa, H. Khaled & A. Fahmy, Data in Brief, 2020, 28, 104863,’” Data Brief, vol. 48, art. no. 109247, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.dib.2023.109247.
[8] S. Ren, K. He, R. Girshick, and J. Sun, “Faster R-CNN: Towards real-time object detection with region proposal networks,” IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., vol. 39, no. 6, pp. 1137–1149, 2017, doi: 10.1109/TPAMI.2016.2577031.
[9] O. Ronneberger, P. Fischer, and T. Brox, “U-Net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation,” in Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention (MICCAI), 2015, pp. 234–241, doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-24574-4_28.
[10] T.-Y. Lin, M. Maire, S. Belongie, J. Hays, P. Perona, D. Ramanan, P. Dollár, and C. L. Zitnick, “Microsoft COCO: Common objects in context,” in Proc. Eur. Conf. Comput. Vis. (ECCV), 2014, pp. 740–755, doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-10602-1_48.
[11] M. Everingham, L. Van Gool, C. K. I. Williams, J. Winn, and A. Zisserman, “The PASCAL Visual Object Classes (VOC) challenge,” Int. J. Comput. Vis., vol. 88, no. 2, pp. 303–338, 2010, doi: 10.1007/s11263-009-0275-7.
[12] A. Buslaev, V. I. Iglovikov, E. Khvedchenya, A. Parinov, M. Druzhinin, and A. A. Kalinin, “Albumentations: Fast and flexible image augmentations,” Information, vol. 11, no. 2, art. no. 125, 2020, doi: 10.3390/info11020125.
[13] C. Shorten and T. M. Khoshgoftaar, “A survey on image data augmentation for deep learning,” J. Big Data, vol. 6, art. no. 60, 2019, doi: 10.1186/s40537-019-0197-0.
[14] X. Li, W. Wang, L. Wu, S. Chen, X. Hu, J. Li, J. Tang, and J. Yang, “Generalized focal loss: Learning qualified and distributed bounding boxes for dense object detection,” in Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. (NeurIPS), vol. 33, 2020, pp. 21002–21012.
[15] T.-Y. Lin, P. Goyal, R. Girshick, K. He, and P. Dollár, “Focal loss for dense object detection,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Comput. Vis. (ICCV), Venice, Italy, 2017, pp. 2980–2988, doi: 10.1109/ICCV.2017.324.
[16] J. Deng, W. Dong, R. Socher, L.-J. Li, K. Li, and L. Fei-Fei, “ImageNet: A large-scale hierarchical image database,” in Proc. IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recognit. (CVPR), Miami, FL, USA, 2009, pp. 248–255, doi: 10.1109/CVPR.2009.5206848.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Dilara OĞUZ, Sevdanur GENÇ, Özlem Şevval SÖNMEZ (Author)

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.