10 research outputs found
What Your Radiologist Might be Missing: Using Machine Learning to Identify Mislabeled Instances of X-ray Images
Label quality is an important and common problem in contemporary supervised machine learning research. Mislabeled instances in a data set might not only impact the performance of machine learning models negatively but also make it more difficult to explain, and thus trust, the predictions of those models. While extant research has especially focused on the ex-ante improvement of label quality by proposing improvements to the labeling process, more recent research has started to investigate the use of machine learning-based approaches to identify mislabeled instances in training data sets automatically. In this study, we propose a two-staged pipeline for the automatic detection of potentially mislabeled instances in a large medical data set. Our results show that our pipeline successfully detects mislabeled instances, helping us to identify 7.4% of mislabeled instances of Cardiomegaly in the data set. With our research, we contribute to ongoing efforts regarding data quality in machine learning
What Your Radiologist Might be Missing: Using Machine Learning to Identify Mislabeled Instances of X-ray Images
Label quality is an important and common problem in contemporary supervised machine learning research. Mislabeled instances in a data set might not only impact the performance of machine learning models negatively but also make it more difficult to explain, and thus trust, the predictions of those models. While extant research has especially focused on the ex-ante improvement of label quality by proposing improvements to the labeling process, more recent research has started to investigate the use of machine learning-based approaches to identify mislabeled instances in training data sets automatically. In this study, we propose a two-staged pipeline for the automatic detection of potentially mislabeled instances in a large medical data set. Our results show that our pipeline successfully detects mislabeled instances, helping us to identify 7.4% of mislabeled instances of Cardiomegaly in the data set. With our research, we contribute to ongoing efforts regarding data quality in machine learning
Common Limitations of Image Processing Metrics:A Picture Story
While the importance of automatic image analysis is continuously increasing,
recent meta-research revealed major flaws with respect to algorithm validation.
Performance metrics are particularly key for meaningful, objective, and
transparent performance assessment and validation of the used automatic
algorithms, but relatively little attention has been given to the practical
pitfalls when using specific metrics for a given image analysis task. These are
typically related to (1) the disregard of inherent metric properties, such as
the behaviour in the presence of class imbalance or small target structures,
(2) the disregard of inherent data set properties, such as the non-independence
of the test cases, and (3) the disregard of the actual biomedical domain
interest that the metrics should reflect. This living dynamically document has
the purpose to illustrate important limitations of performance metrics commonly
applied in the field of image analysis. In this context, it focuses on
biomedical image analysis problems that can be phrased as image-level
classification, semantic segmentation, instance segmentation, or object
detection task. The current version is based on a Delphi process on metrics
conducted by an international consortium of image analysis experts from more
than 60 institutions worldwide.Comment: This is a dynamic paper on limitations of commonly used metrics. The
current version discusses metrics for image-level classification, semantic
segmentation, object detection and instance segmentation. For missing use
cases, comments or questions, please contact [email protected] or
[email protected]. Substantial contributions to this document will be
acknowledged with a co-authorshi
Understanding metric-related pitfalls in image analysis validation
Validation metrics are key for the reliable tracking of scientific progress
and for bridging the current chasm between artificial intelligence (AI)
research and its translation into practice. However, increasing evidence shows
that particularly in image analysis, metrics are often chosen inadequately in
relation to the underlying research problem. This could be attributed to a lack
of accessibility of metric-related knowledge: While taking into account the
individual strengths, weaknesses, and limitations of validation metrics is a
critical prerequisite to making educated choices, the relevant knowledge is
currently scattered and poorly accessible to individual researchers. Based on a
multi-stage Delphi process conducted by a multidisciplinary expert consortium
as well as extensive community feedback, the present work provides the first
reliable and comprehensive common point of access to information on pitfalls
related to validation metrics in image analysis. Focusing on biomedical image
analysis but with the potential of transfer to other fields, the addressed
pitfalls generalize across application domains and are categorized according to
a newly created, domain-agnostic taxonomy. To facilitate comprehension,
illustrations and specific examples accompany each pitfall. As a structured
body of information accessible to researchers of all levels of expertise, this
work enhances global comprehension of a key topic in image analysis validation.Comment: Shared first authors: Annika Reinke, Minu D. Tizabi; shared senior
authors: Paul F. J\"ager, Lena Maier-Hei
Towards a Machine Learning-based Decision Support System for Dispatching Helicopters in New Zealand
Helicopters play an important role in emergency medical service systems worldwide. In sparsely populated countries like New Zealand with long distances between hospitals, helicopters are often the best way to help critically injured patients. As helicopters are extremely costly, they should only be dispatched when really necessary. In this paper, we use data from the South Island of New Zealand to test several Machine Learning approaches and show that they can be used to support dispatchers by identifying emergencies likely to require a helicopter response. We follow a non-static dataset, as the information is successively available during an emergency, and demonstrate that even a limited approach, based only on geographic incident information, can yield an Average Precision of 94% for highlighting critical emergencies. In the latter parts of this paper, we investigate different compositions of training data to assess the impact of a potential concept drift
Why is the winner the best?
International benchmarking competitions have become fundamental for the comparative performance assessment of image analysis methods. However, little attention has been given to investigating what can be learnt from these competitions. Do they really generate scientific progress? What are common and successful participation strategies? What makes a solution superior to a competing method? To address this gap in the literature, we performed a multi-center study with all 80 competitions that were conducted in the scope of IEEE ISBI 2021 and MICCAI 2021. Statistical analyses performed based on comprehensive descriptions of the submitted algorithms linked to their rank as well as the underlying participation strategies revealed common characteristics of winning solutions. These typically include the use of multi-task learning (63%) and/or multi-stage pipelines (61%), and a focus on augmentation (100%), image preprocessing (97%), data curation (79%), and postprocessing (66%). The "typical" lead of a winning team is a computer scientist with a doctoral degree, five years of experience in biomedical image analysis, and four years of experience in deep learning. Two core general development strategies stood out for highly-ranked teams: the reflection of the metrics in the method design and the focus on analyzing and handling failure cases. According to the organizers, 43% of the winning algorithms exceeded the state of the art but only 11% completely solved the respective domain problem. The insights of our study could help researchers (1) improve algorithm development strategies when approaching new problems, and (2) focus on open research questions revealed by this work
Metrics reloaded: Pitfalls and recommendations for image analysis validation
The field of automatic biomedical image analysis crucially depends on robust
and meaningful performance metrics for algorithm validation. Current metric
usage, however, is often ill-informed and does not reflect the underlying
domain interest. Here, we present a comprehensive framework that guides
researchers towards choosing performance metrics in a problem-aware manner.
Specifically, we focus on biomedical image analysis problems that can be
interpreted as a classification task at image, object or pixel level. The
framework first compiles domain interest-, target structure-, data set- and
algorithm output-related properties of a given problem into a problem
fingerprint, while also mapping it to the appropriate problem category, namely
image-level classification, semantic segmentation, instance segmentation, or
object detection. It then guides users through the process of selecting and
applying a set of appropriate validation metrics while making them aware of
potential pitfalls related to individual choices. In this paper, we describe
the current status of the Metrics Reloaded recommendation framework, with the
goal of obtaining constructive feedback from the image analysis community. The
current version has been developed within an international consortium of more
than 60 image analysis experts and will be made openly available as a
user-friendly toolkit after community-driven optimization.Comment: Shared first authors: Lena Maier-Hein, Annika Reinke. arXiv admin
note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:2104.0564
Metrics reloaded: recommendations for image analysis validation
Increasing evidence shows that flaws in machine learning (ML) algorithm validation are an underestimated global problem. In biomedical image analysis, chosen performance metrics often do not reflect the domain interest, and thus fail to adequately measure scientific progress and hinder translation of ML techniques into practice. To overcome this, we created Metrics Reloaded, a comprehensive framework guiding researchers in the problem-aware selection of metrics. Developed by a large international consortium in a multistage Delphi process, it is based on the novel concept of a problem fingerprint—a structured representation of the given problem that captures all aspects that are relevant for metric selection, from the domain interest to the properties of the target structure(s), dataset and algorithm output. On the basis of the problem fingerprint, users are guided through the process of choosing and applying appropriate validation metrics while being made aware of potential pitfalls. Metrics Reloaded targets image analysis problems that can be interpreted as classification tasks at image, object or pixel level, namely image-level classification, object detection, semantic segmentation and instance segmentation tasks. To improve the user experience, we implemented the framework in the Metrics Reloaded online tool. Following the convergence of ML methodology across application domains, Metrics Reloaded fosters the convergence of validation methodology. Its applicability is demonstrated for various biomedical use cases
Metrics reloaded : recommendations for image analysis validation
Increasing evidence shows that flaws in machine learning (ML) algorithm validation are an underestimated global problem. In biomedical image analysis, chosen performance metrics often do not reflect the domain interest, and thus fail to adequately measure scientific progress and hinder translation of ML techniques into practice. To overcome this, we created Metrics Reloaded, a comprehensive framework guiding researchers in the problem-aware selection of metrics. Developed by a large international consortium in a multistage Delphi process, it is based on the novel concept of a problem fingerprint-a structured representation of the given problem that captures all aspects that are relevant for metric selection, from the domain interest to the properties of the target structure(s), dataset and algorithm output. On the basis of the problem fingerprint, users are guided through the process of choosing and applying appropriate validation metrics while being made aware of potential pitfalls. Metrics Reloaded targets image analysis problems that can be interpreted as classification tasks at image, object or pixel level, namely image-level classification, object detection, semantic segmentation and instance segmentation tasks. To improve the user experience, we implemented the framework in the Metrics Reloaded online tool. Following the convergence of ML methodology across application domains, Metrics Reloaded fosters the convergence of validation methodology. Its applicability is demonstrated for various biomedical use cases. [Abstract copyright: © 2024. Springer Nature America, Inc.
Why is the winner the best?
International benchmarking competitions have become fundamental for the comparative performance assessment of image analysis methods. However, little attention has been given to investigating what can be learnt from these competitions. Do they really generate scientific progress? What are common and successful participation strategies? What makes a solution superior to a competing method? To address this gap in the literature, we performed a multi-center study with all 80 competitions that were conducted in the scope of IEEE ISBI 2021 and MICCAI 2021. Statistical analyses performed based on comprehensive descriptions of the submitted algorithms linked to their rank as well as the underlying participation strategies revealed common characteristics of winning solutions. These typically include the use of multi-task learning (63%) and/or multi-stage pipelines (61%), and a focus on augmentation (100%), image preprocessing (97%), data curation (79%), and postprocessing (66%). The "typical" lead of a winning team is a computer scientist with a doctoral degree, five years of experience in biomedical image analysis, and four years of experience in deep learning. Two core general development strategies stood out for highly-ranked teams: the reflection of the metrics in the method design and the focus on analyzing and handling failure cases. According to the organizers, 43% of the winning algorithms exceeded the state of the art but only 11% completely solved the respective domain problem. The insights of our study could help researchers (1) improve algorithm development strategies when approaching new problems, and (2) focus on open research questions revealed by this work