Fully Convolutional Neural Networks to Detect Clinical Dermoscopic Features
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The presence of certain clinical dermoscopic features within a skin lesion may indicate melanoma, and automatically detecting these features may lead to more quantitative and reproducible diagnoses. We reformulate the task of classifying clinical dermoscopic features within superpixels as a segmentation problem, and propose a fully convolutional neural network to detect clinical dermoscopic features from dermoscopy skin lesion images. Our neural network architecture uses interpolated feature maps from several intermediate network layers, and addresses imbalanced labels by minimizing a negative multilabel Dice-F <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">1</sub> score, where the score is computed across the minibatch for each label. Our approach ranked first place in the 2017 ISICISBI Part 2: Dermoscopic Feature Classification Task, challenge over both the provided validation and test datasets, achieving a 0.895% area under the receiver operator characteristic curve score. We show how simple baseline models can outrank state-of-the-art approaches when using the official metrics of the challenge, and propose to use a fuzzy Jaccard Index that ignores the empty set (i.e., masks devoid of positive pixels) when ranking models. Our results suggest that the classification of clinical dermoscopic features can be effectively approached as a segmentation problem, and the current metrics used to rank models may not well capture the efficacy of the model. We plan to make our trained model and code publicly available.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it