Synthesis of diagnostic quality cancer pathology images by generative adversarial networks
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
Deep learning-based computer vision methods have recently made remarkable breakthroughs in the analysis and classification of cancer pathology images. However, there has been relatively little investigation of the utility of deep neural networks to synthesize medical images. In this study, we evaluated the efficacy of generative adversarial networks to synthesize high-resolution pathology images of 10 histological types of cancer, including five cancer types from The Cancer Genome Atlas and the five major histological subtypes of ovarian carcinoma. The quality of these images was assessed using a comprehensive survey of board-certified pathologists (n = 9) and pathology trainees (n = 6). Our results show that the real and synthetic images are classified by histotype with comparable accuracies and the synthetic images are visually indistinguishable from real images. Furthermore, we trained deep convolutional neural networks to diagnose the different cancer types and determined that the synthetic images perform as well as additional real images when used to supplement a small training set. These findings have important applications in proficiency testing of medical practitioners and quality assurance in clinical laboratories. Furthermore, training of computer-aided diagnostic systems can benefit from synthetic images where labeled datasets are limited (e.g. rare cancers). We have created a publicly available website where clinicians and researchers can attempt questions from the image survey (http://gan.aimlab.ca/). © 2020 Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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