MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405923428 · doi:10.1038/s41598-024-81724-0

Attention-guided convolutional network for bias-mitigated and interpretable oral lesion classification

2024· article· en· W4405923428 on OpenAlexafffund
Adeetya Patel, Camille Besombes, Theerthika Dillibabu, Mridul Sharma, Faleh Tamimi, Maxime Ducret, Peter Chauvin, Sreenath Madathil

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMcGill University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsInterpretabilityArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceGround truthDeep learningSegmentationRobustness (evolution)Pattern recognition (psychology)LesionCategorizationConvolutional neural networkMachine learningMedicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate diagnosis of oral lesions, early indicators of oral cancer, is a complex clinical challenge. Recent advances in deep learning have demonstrated potential in supporting clinical decisions. This paper introduces a deep learning model for classifying oral lesions, focusing on accuracy, interpretability, and reducing dataset bias. The model integrates three components: (i) a Classification Stream, utilizing a CNN to categorize images into 16 lesion types (baseline model), (ii) a Guidance Stream, which aligns class activation maps with clinically relevant areas using ground truth segmentation masks (GAIN model), and (iii) an Anatomical Site Prediction Stream, improving interpretability by predicting lesion location (GAIN+ASP model). The development dataset comprised 2765 intra-oral digital images of 16 lesion types from 1079 patients seen at an oral pathology clinic between 1999 and 2021. The GAIN model demonstrated a 7.2% relative improvement in accuracy over the baseline for 16-class classification, with superior class-specific balanced accuracy and AUC scores. Additionally, the GAIN model enhanced lesion localization and improved the alignment between attention maps and ground truth. The proposed models also exhibited greater robustness against dataset bias, as shown in ablation studies.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicAI in cancer detectionFrench-language works237,207