MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

ProtoTree-MIL: Interpretable Multiple Instance Learning for Whole Slide Image Classification

2024· article· en· W4402351346 on OpenAlexaff
Zhifeng Wu, Xiaohui Li, Luning Wang, Shendi Wang, Yufei Cui, Jiahai Wang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceContextual image classificationPattern recognition (psychology)Image (mathematics)Machine learningComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Whole slide image (WSI) classification is one of the important fields of digital pathology, and is generally solved as a weakly supervised learning problem by adopting multiple instance learning (MIL). However, a common but crucial challenge faced by existing MIL models is their inability to provide convincing explanations that can win the trust of pathologists and be applied to clinical diagnosis. In addition, most attention-based MIL models use attention scores to represent the importance of each patch in the WSI rather than inferring patch probabilities directly, which does not accurately detect the critical patches. To address these two challenges, we propose a ProtoTree based MIL model for WSI classification, called ProtoTree-MIL, where ProtoTree is an interpretable model that combines the advantages of prototype-learning and decision tree. ProtoTree-MIL not only explains why some patches are important for the final prediction through prototype-learning, but also provides global and local explanation through decision tree. We also propose a method to infer patch probabilities and measure their importance under the framework of ProtoTree-MIL. By conducting various experiments on three public WSI datasets, Camelyon16, TCGA-NSCLC, and TCGA-RCC, we demonstrate that our proposed ProtoTree-MIL can achieve a competitive performance to the state-of-the-art MIL models but provide more persuasive explanations than them. Explicitly generating patch probabilities also makes ProtoTree-MIL more accurate to detect the key patches than other attention-based MIL models. Specially, by evaluating our model on a real clinical gastritis and gastric cancer dataset, we show the explanations provided by ProtoTree-MIL are significant and faithful.

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)0.002
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0060.002
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAI in cancer detectionFrench-language works237,207