MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309668563 · doi:10.1038/s41598-022-24317-z

Bias reduction in representation of histopathology images using deep feature selection

2022· article· en· W4309668563 on OpenAlexaff
Azam Asilian Bidgoli, Shahryar Rahnamayan, Taher Dehkharghanian, Ali Grami, Hamid R. Tizhoosh

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooMcMaster UniversityLaurentian UniversityBrock UniversityOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceGeneralizationPattern recognition (psychology)Feature selectionFeature (linguistics)Selection biasSet (abstract data type)Machine learningData miningStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Appearing traces of bias in deep networks is a serious reliability issue which can play a significant role in ethics and generalization related concerns. Recent studies report that the deep features extracted from the histopathology images of The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA), the largest publicly available archive, are surprisingly able to accurately classify the whole slide images (WSIs) based on their acquisition site while these features are extracted to primarily discriminate cancer types. This is clear evidence that the utilized Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) unexpectedly detect the specific patterns of the source site, i.e, the hospital of origin, rather than histomorphologic patterns, a biased behavior resulting in degraded trust and generalization. This observation motivated us to propose a method to alleviate the destructive impact of hospital bias through a novel feature selection process. To this effect, we have proposed an evolutionary strategy to select a small set of optimal features to not only accurately represent the histological patterns of tissue samples but also to eliminate the features contributing to internal bias toward the institution. The defined objective function for an optimal subset selection of features is to minimize the accuracy of the model to classify the source institutions which is basically defined as a bias indicator. By the conducted experiments, the selected features extracted by the state-of-the-art network trained on TCGA images (i.e., the KimiaNet), considerably decreased the institutional bias, while improving the quality of features to discriminate the cancer types. In addition, the selected features could significantly improve the results of external validation compared to the entire set of features which has been negatively affected by bias. The proposed scheme is a model-independent approach which can be employed when it is possible to define a bias indicator as a participating objective in a feature selection process; even with unknown bias sources.

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 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)0.002
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.144
Threshold uncertainty score0.374

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations21
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicAI in cancer detectionFrench-language works237,207