MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3208874525 · doi:10.1145/3469841

An Explainable Deep Learning Ensemble Model for Robust Diagnosis of Diabetic Retinopathy Grading

2021· article· en· W3208874525 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing Communications and Applications · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceConvolutional neural networkFundus (uterus)Deep learningDiabetic retinopathyClassifier (UML)Grading (engineering)Machine learningPattern recognition (psychology)MedicineOphthalmologyDiabetes mellitus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.868
Threshold uncertainty score0.737

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.276 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it