MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Explainable Transform Learning for Interpretable Medical Image Analysis

2025· article· W7115600894 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicExplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
Canadian institutionsHorizon College and Seminary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterpretabilityDeep learningWorkflowFeature learningConvolutional neural networkMedical imagingRepresentation (politics)Feature engineeringTrustworthiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rapid adoption of deep learning methods in medical imaging has led to remarkable improvements in detection, segmentation, and diagnosis tasks. However, the widespread use of complex black-box models raises significant concerns regarding interpretability, transparency, and trustworthiness particularly in clinical decision-making where explainability is critical. This paper introduces a novel Explainable Transform Learning (ETL) framework designed to unify the strengths of data-driven representation learning with interpretable mathematical transforms. Unlike conventional convolutional or purely deep architectures, the proposed method explicitly integrates domain-relevant transform functions (e.g., wavelet, Fourier, and Radon transforms) into the learning pipeline, ensuring that intermediate features remain clinically interpretable. We demonstrate the framework’s effectiveness on multiple medical imaging modalities, including MRI, CT, and histopathology, where interpretability is often as important as accuracy. Experimental results show that ETL achieves competitive performance with state-of-the-art deep models while offering clear, human-understandable feature attributions that correlate with clinical markers. Moreover, our method reduces the dependency on large annotated datasets by leveraging structured priors, making it well-suited for data-scarce healthcare applications. This work contributes a step toward transparent and trustworthy artificial intelligence in medicine, highlighting that improved diagnostic performance need not come at the cost of explainability. We conclude with a discussion on how ETL can be extended for real-time clinical workflows and its potential integration into next-generation decision-support systems.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.877
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.300 · 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
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 topicExplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)French-language works237,207