Adaptive Augmentation of Medical Data Using Independently Conditional Variational Auto-Encoders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Current deep supervised learning methods typically require large amounts of labeled data for training. Since there is a significant cost associated with clinical data acquisition and labeling, medical datasets used for training these models are relatively small in size. In this paper, we aim to alleviate this limitation by proposing a variational generative model along with an effective data augmentation approach that utilizes the generative model to synthesize data. In our approach, the model learns the probability distribution of image data conditioned on a latent variable and the corresponding labels. The trained model can then be used to synthesize new images for data augmentation. We demonstrate the effectiveness of the approach on two independent clinical datasets consisting of ultrasound images of the spine and magnetic resonance images of the brain. For the spine dataset, a baseline and a residual model achieve an accuracy of 85% and 92%, respectively, using our method compared to 78% and 83% using a conventional training approach for image classification task. For the brain dataset, a baseline and a U-net network achieve an accuracy of 84% and 88%, respectively, in Dice coefficient in tumor segmentation compared to 80% and 83% for the convention training approach.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".