MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Symmetric Contrastive Loss for Out-of-Distribution Skin Lesion Detection

2022· article· en· W4224990359 on OpenAlexaff
Xuan Li, Christian Desrosiers, Xue Liu

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 IEEE 19th International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie SupérieureMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceVariance (accounting)Adversarial systemTask (project management)Class (philosophy)Machine learningPattern recognition (psychology)Scale (ratio)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Detecting out-of-distribution (OOD) data has been a challenging task for deep learning models trained with real-life datasets. This work studies OOD detection in medical images where inter-class difference (e.g., variations in visual appearance across separate diseases) outweighs intra-class difference (e.g., same disease but on different locations or people). To improve OOD detection performance, we propose a self-supervised learning approach that can better capture inter-/intra-class variance using a novel symmetric contrastive loss. Two large-scale, publicly-available skin lesion datasets, HAM10000 and DermNet, are adopted in our study. Comprehensive experiments, including three different distributional shifts, disease-specific OOD detection, as well as an adversarial attack, are conducted to validate the effectiveness of our 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 IEEE 19th International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI)Same topicCutaneous Melanoma Detection and ManagementFrench-language works237,207