Assessing the Distributional Fidelity of Synthetic Chest X-rays using the Embedded Characteristic Score
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chest X-ray (CXR) images are among the most commonly used diagnostic imaging modalities in clinical practice. Stringent privacy constraints often limit the public dissemination of patient CXR images, contributing to the increasing use of synthetic images produced by deep generative models for data sharing and training machine learning models. Given the high-stakes downstream applications of CXR images, it is crucial to evaluate how faithfully synthetic images reflect the underlying target distribution. We propose the embedded characteristic score (ECS), a flexible evaluation procedure that compares synthetic and patient CXR samples through characteristic function transforms of feature embeddings. The choice of embedding can be tailored to the clinical or scientific context of interest. By leveraging the behavior of characteristic functions near the origin, ECS is sensitive to differences in higher moments and distribution tails, aspects that are often overlooked by commonly used evaluation metrics such as the Fréchet Inception Distance (FID). We establish theoretical properties of ECS and describe a calibration strategy based on a simple resampling procedure. We compare the empirical performance of ECS against FID via simulations and standard benchmark imaging datasets. Assessing synthetic CXR images with ECS uncovers clinically relevant distributional discrepancies relative to patient CXR images. These results highlight the importance of reliable evaluation of synthetic data that inform high-stakes decisions.
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 | 0.005 | 0.043 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".