Class-imbalanced Unsupervised and Semi-Supervised Domain Adaptation for Histopathology Images
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In dealing with the lack of sufficient annotated data and in contrast to supervised learning, unsupervised, self-supervised, and semi-supervised domain adaptation methods are promising approaches, enabling us to transfer knowledge from rich labeled source domains to different (but related) unlabeled target domains, reducing distribution discrepancy between the source and target domains. However, most existing domain adaptation methods do not consider the imbalanced nature of the real-world data, affecting their performance in practice. We propose to overcome this limitation by proposing a novel domain adaptation approach that includes two modifications to the existing models. Firstly, we leverage the focal loss function in response to class-imbalanced labeled data in the source domain. Secondly, we introduce a novel co-training approach to involve pseudo-labeled target data points in the training process. Experiments show that the proposed model can be effective in transferring knowledge from source to target domain. As an example, we use the classification of prostate cancer images into low-cancerous and high-cancerous regions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".