MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417028090 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2512.03339

ProtoEFNet: Dynamic Prototype Learning for Inherently Interpretable Ejection Fraction Estimation in Echocardiography

2025· preprint· W4417028090 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Yeganeh Ghamary, Victoria Wu, Hooman Vaseli, Christina Luong, Teresa S.M. Tsang, Siavash Bigdeli, Purang Abolmaesumi

Bibliographic record

VenueArXiv.org · 2025
Typepreprint
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Function and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchDanmarks Tekniske Universitet
KeywordsDiscriminative modelMetric (unit)Process (computing)Fraction (chemistry)Reliability (semiconductor)Pattern recognition (psychology)Domain (mathematical analysis)Deep learningInterpretability

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ejection fraction (EF) is a crucial metric for assessing cardiac function and diagnosing conditions such as heart failure. Traditionally, EF estimation requires manual tracing and domain expertise, making the process time-consuming and subject to interobserver variability. Most current deep learning methods for EF prediction are black-box models with limited transparency, which reduces clinical trust. Some post-hoc explainability methods have been proposed to interpret the decision-making process after the prediction is made. However, these explanations do not guide the model's internal reasoning and therefore offer limited reliability in clinical applications. To address this, we introduce ProtoEFNet, a novel video-based prototype learning model for continuous EF regression. The model learns dynamic spatiotemporal prototypes that capture clinically meaningful cardiac motion patterns. Additionally, the proposed Prototype Angular Separation (PAS) loss enforces discriminative representations across the continuous EF spectrum. Our experiments on the EchonetDynamic dataset show that ProtoEFNet can achieve accuracy on par with its non-interpretable counterpart while providing clinically relevant insight. The ablation study shows that the proposed loss boosts performance with a 2% increase in F1 score from 77.67$\pm$2.68 to 79.64$\pm$2.10. Our source code is available at: https://github.com/DeepRCL/ProtoEF

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)0.005
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.279 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArXiv.orgSame topicCardiovascular Function and Risk FactorsFrench-language works237,207