An Explainable Deep Learning Ensemble Model for Robust Diagnosis of Diabetic Retinopathy Grading
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is one of the most common causes of vision loss in people who have diabetes for a prolonged period. Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) have become increasingly popular for computer-aided DR diagnosis using retinal fundus images. While these CNNs are highly reliable, their lack of sufficient explainability prevents them from being widely used in medical practice. In this article, we propose a novel explainable deep learning ensemble model where weights from different models are fused into a single model to extract salient features from various retinal lesions found on fundus images. The extracted features are then fed to a custom classifier for the final diagnosis of DR severity level. The model is trained on an APTOS dataset containing retinal fundus images of various DR grades using a cyclical learning rates strategy with an automatic learning rate finder for decaying the learning rate to improve model accuracy. We develop an explainability approach by leveraging gradient-weighted class activation mapping and shapely adaptive explanations to highlight the areas of fundus images that are most indicative of different DR stages. This allows ophthalmologists to view our model's decision in a way that they can understand. Evaluation results using three different datasets (APTOS, MESSIDOR, IDRiD) show the effectiveness of our model, achieving superior classification rates with a high degree of precision (0.970), sensitivity (0.980), and AUC (0.978). We believe that the proposed model, which jointly offers state-of-the-art diagnosis performance and explainability, will address the black-box nature of deep CNN models in robust detection of DR grading.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".