MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409159667 · doi:10.1117/12.3046239

Graph-based representation of retinal lesions for an interpretable diagnosis of diabetic retinopathy

2025· article· en· W4409159667 on OpenAlexaff
Zacharie Legault, Clément Playout, Fantin Girard, Farida Chériet

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsHôpital Maisonneuve-RosemontPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiabetic retinopathyRetinalComputer scienceGraphRepresentation (politics)Artificial intelligenceMedicinePattern recognition (psychology)OphthalmologyDiabetes mellitusTheoretical computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is a leading cause of blindness among the working-age population worldwide. DR diagnosis and grading are based on identifying characteristic retinal lesions through fundus imaging. Despite the effectiveness of deep learning techniques in DR detection and grading, these methods often lack interpretability. This work introduces a novel approach that leverages a graph representation of the retina, where each node corresponds to a lesion, and a graph neural network (GNN) is used to grade DR. Our method aligns with clinical guidelines by using lesion-specific information while maintaining the capacity of deep learning models. We first segment DR lesions using a pre-trained convolutional neural network (CNN) and then construct a graph with lesions as nodes connected to their k nearest neighbours. Features for each node are derived from the lesion-specific regions in the fundus image. The resulting lesion graph is classified using a graph attention network (GAT) to make the DR grade prediction. Our method was evaluated on multiple public datasets, achieving performance comparable to state-of-the-art techniques based on quadratic weighted Cohen’s kappa and other metrics. This graph-based approach offers a balance between local lesion segmentation and global image classification, potentially enhancing interpretability and robustness for clinical applications.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.843
Threshold uncertainty score0.272

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.323 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRetinal Imaging and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207