Deep Learning in Automatic Diabetic Retinopathy Detection and Grading Systems: A Comprehensive Survey and Comparison of Methods
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diabetic Retinopathy is one of the leading global causes of vision impairment and blindness in humans. It has seen a rise in prevalence, necessitating the development of advanced automatic detection methods. This paper presents a survey of the evolution in deep learning techniques for diabetic retinopathy detection, emphasizing the transition from traditional machine learning to sophisticated deep learning architectures such as convolutional neural networks. It discusses the role of transfer learning, end-to-end learning, and hybrid models in overcoming medical detection challenges while highlighting the need for artificial intelligence interpretability and real-time screening integration in clinical workflows. Building on this survey, the paper introduces a focused study on cross-dataset deployment of transfer learning for diabetic retinopathy detection and grading. Consequently, this paper evaluates 26 pre-trained models from various convolutional neural network families to provide a comprehensive comparison between the state-of-the-art CNN architectures in the field. Additionally, this study also employs Grad-CAM visualization to interpret the model’s decision-making, bridging advanced artificial intelligence techniques with practical healthcare applications for diabetic retinopathy.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it