MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413275632 · doi:10.1016/j.media.2025.103764

BiasPruner: Mitigating bias transfer in continual learning for fair medical image analysis

2025· article· en· W4413275632 on OpenAlexafffund
Nourhan Bayasi, Jamil Fayyad, Alceu Bissoto, Ghassan Hamarneh, Rafeef Garbi

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Image Analysis · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of British Columbia Hospital
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceTransfer of learningComputer scienceImage (mathematics)Computer visionMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Continual Learning (CL) enables neural networks to learn new tasks while retaining previous knowledge. However, most CL methods fail to address bias transfer, where spurious correlations propagate to future tasks or influence past knowledge. This bidirectional bias transfer negatively impacts model performance and fairness, especially in medical imaging, where it can lead to misdiagnoses and unequal treatment. In this work, we show that conventional CL methods amplify these biases, posing risks for diverse patient cohorts. To address this, we propose BiasPruner, a framework that mitigates bias propagation through debiased subnetworks, while preserving sequential learning and avoiding catastrophic forgetting. BiasPruner computes a bias attribution score to identify and prune network units responsible for spurious correlations, creating task-specific subnetworks that learn unbiased representations. As new tasks are learned, the framework integrates non-biased units from previous subnetworks to preserve transferable knowledge and prevent bias transfer. During inference, a task-agnostic gating mechanism selects the optimal subnetwork for robust predictions. We evaluate BiasPruner on medical imaging benchmarks, including skin lesion and chest X-ray classification tasks, where biased data (e.g., spurious skin tone correlations) can exacerbate disparities. Our experiments show that BiasPruner outperforms state-of-the-art CL methods in both accuracy and fairness. Code is available at: BiasPruner.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.968
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.011
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.291 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical Image AnalysisSame topicDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot LearningFrench-language works237,207