Source-Free Domain Adaptation of Weakly-Supervised Object Localization Models for Histology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Given the emergence of deep learning, digital pathology has gained popularity for cancer diagnosis based on histology images. Deep weakly supervised object localization (WSOL) models can be trained to classify histology images according to cancer grade and identify regions of interest (ROIs) for interpretation, using inexpensive global image-class annotations. A WSOL model initially trained on some labeled source image data can be adapted using unlabeled target data in cases of significant domain shifts caused by variations in staining, scanners, and cancer type. In this paper, we focus on source-free (unsupervised) domain adaptation (SFDA), a challenging problem where a pre-trained source model is adapted to a new target domain without using any source domain data for privacy and efficiency reasons. SFDA of WSOL models raises several challenges in histology, most notably because they are not intended to adapt for both classification and localization tasks. In this paper, 4 state-of-the-art SFDA methods, each one representative of a main SFDA family, are compared for WSOL in terms of classification and localization accuracy. They are the SFDA-Distribution Estimation, Source HypOthesis Transfer, Cross-Domain Contrastive Learning, and Adaptively Domain Statistics Alignment. Experimental results on the challenging Glas (smaller, breast cancer) and Came-lyon16 (larger, colon cancer) histology datasets indicate that these SFDA methods typically perform poorly for localization after adaptation when optimized for classification. Code: github.com/AlexisGuichemerreCode/survey_hist_wsol_sfda
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".