4.7 Article

MS-CLAM: Mixed supervision for the classification and localization of tumors in Whole Slide Images

期刊

MEDICAL IMAGE ANALYSIS
卷 85, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.media.2023.102763

关键词

Digital pathology; Mixed supervision; Deep learning; Camelyon16; DigestPath2019

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Using mixed supervision, we improve the classification and localization performances of a weakly-supervised model based on attention-based deep Multiple Instance Learning. With a limited amount of patch-level labeled slides, we achieve performance close to fully-supervised models.
Given the size of digitized Whole Slide Images (WSIs), it is generally laborious and time-consuming for pathologists to exhaustively delineate objects within them, especially with datasets containing hundreds of slides to annotate. Most of the time, only slide-level labels are available, giving rise to the development of weakly-supervised models. However, it is often difficult to obtain from such models accurate object localization, e.g., patches with tumor cells in a tumor detection task, as they are mainly designed for slide-level classification. Using the attention-based deep Multiple Instance Learning (MIL) model as our base weakly -supervised model, we propose to use mixed supervision - i.e., the use of both slide-level and patch-level labels - to improve both the classification and the localization performances of the original model, using only a limited amount of patch-level labeled slides. In addition, we propose an attention loss term to regularize the attention between key instances, and a paired batch method to create balanced batches for the model. First, we show that the changes made to the model already improve its performance and interpretability in the weakly-supervised setting. Furthermore, when using only between 12 and 62% of the total available patch-level annotations, we can reach performance close to fully-supervised models on the tumor classification datasets DigestPath2019 and Camelyon16.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据