MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Impact of Adversarial Attacks on Medical Imaging AI Systems

2024· article· en· W4399529617 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
Canadian institutionsHorizon College and Seminary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdversarial systemComputer scienceMedical imagingArtificial intelligenceComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bad actors threaten medical imaging AI systems' dependability and safety, affecting patient care and diagnosis accuracy. A novel defense against this expanding threat is adversarial defense via ensemble integration. Explainable Feature-Based Defense (XFBD), Adversarial Training with Transfer Learning (ATTL), and Robust Classifier Augmentation (RCA) are three innovative techniques that have never been combined. RCA enhances training with controlled aggression. This allows the model to distinguish authentic medical imaging data from altered sources. ATTL makes transfer-learning-taught models more resistant to topic-specific hostile approaches. XFBD simplifies the defensive process, helping us comprehend how the model picks and fights different methods. A comparison indicates that ADEI always outperforms tried-and-true approaches. ADEI outperforms typical approaches in accuracy, sensitivity, precision, stability, interpretability, private protection, and computing cost. Strong safeguards are needed as AI-powered healthcare research becomes increasingly popular. As a lighthouse, ADEI protects everything from attack. The math behind each section and how they work together to strengthen the system make it valuable. ADEI advances AI-assisted healthcare's future. Testing instruments must be accurate and dependable in this industry.

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)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.366

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.320 · 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