Matthews Correlation Coefficient Loss For Deep Convolutional Networks: Application To Skin Lesion Segmentation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The segmentation of skin lesions is a crucial task in clinical decision support systems for the computer aided diagnosis of skin lesions. Although deep learning-based approaches have improved segmentation performance, these models are often susceptible to class imbalance in the data, particularly, the fraction of the image occupied by the background healthy skin. Despite variations of the popular Dice loss function being proposed to tackle the class imbalance problem, the Dice loss formulation does not penalize misclassifications of the background pixels. We propose a novel metric-based loss function using the Matthews correlation coefficient, a metric that has been shown to be efficient in scenarios with skewed class distributions, and use it to optimize deep segmentation models. Evaluations on three skin lesion image datasets: the ISBI ISIC 2017 Skin Lesion Segmentation Challenge dataset, the DermoFit Image Library, and the PH2 dataset, show that models trained using the proposed loss function outperform those trained using Dice loss by 11.25%, 4.87%, and 0.76% respectively in the mean Jaccard index. The code is available at https://github.com/kakumarabhishek/MCC-Loss.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".