Paper Reading AI Learner

With foundation-model features, aggregator complexity does not improve cross-hospital discrimination in gastric whole-slide image classification

2026-10-30 06:43:47
Nheng Vanchhay, Ali Hussain, Khan Ziaullah, Moon-Il Joo, Md Ariful Islam Mozumder, Rashedul Islam Sumon, Won-Ae Lee, Min-Sun Cho, Hyeong-Chan Shin, Yujun Park, Baek Hwan Cho, Nam-Hoon Cho, Heejung An, Heung-Kook Choi, Haeyoun Kang, Hyunki Kim, Hee Cheol Kim

Abstract

Whole-slide image classifiers are usually developed within one hospital and often go untested at unseen hospitals. We assembled 5,036 haematoxylin-and-eosin-stained gastric slides from five Korean hospitals, scanned at 20x and 40x, and compared multiple-instance learning aggregators under leave-one-hospital-out validation on frozen pathology foundation-model features. A hierarchical patch-region-slide graph aggregator (CHIME-MIL) with site alignment and two-scale fusion reached a mean area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.837, above six conventional attention and transformer aggregators trained without these steps. Under a matched recipe it did not exceed attention-based pooling, and global max pooling given the same alignment and fusion was better (AUC 0.855, P = 0.0002). The alignment, which subtracts each hospital's mean feature vector without labels, onboarded a new hospital from ten unlabelled slides and cost 0.002 AUC without held-out-hospital data, but its accuracy gains were small and inconsistent. The model had low top-label calibration error (0.053) but under-confident malignancy probabilities, and removing its most-attended patches lowered the malignancy probability far more than removing random patches. With these features, more complex aggregators did not improve discrimination; what a deployable system adds is label-free onboarding, calibration checks and auditable evidence.

Abstract (translated)

URL

https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.41328

PDF

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2610.41328.pdf


Tags
3D Action Action_Localization Action_Recognition Activity Adversarial Agent Attention Autonomous Bert Boundary_Detection Caption Chat Classification CNN Compressive_Sensing Contour Contrastive_Learning Deep_Learning Denoising Detection Dialog Diffusion Drone Dynamic_Memory_Network Edge_Detection Embedding Embodied Emotion Enhancement Face Face_Detection Face_Recognition Facial_Landmark Few-Shot Gait_Recognition GAN Gaze_Estimation Gesture Gradient_Descent Handwriting Human_Parsing Image_Caption Image_Classification Image_Compression Image_Enhancement Image_Generation Image_Matting Image_Retrieval Inference Inpainting Intelligent_Chip Knowledge Knowledge_Graph Language_Model LLM Matching Medical Memory_Networks Multi_Modal Multi_Task NAS NMT Object_Detection Object_Tracking OCR Ontology Optical_Character Optical_Flow Optimization Person_Re-identification Point_Cloud Portrait_Generation Pose Pose_Estimation Prediction QA Quantitative Quantitative_Finance Quantization Re-identification Recognition Recommendation Reconstruction Regularization Reinforcement_Learning Relation Relation_Extraction Represenation Represenation_Learning Restoration Review RNN Robot Salient Scene_Classification Scene_Generation Scene_Parsing Scene_Text Segmentation Self-Supervised Semantic_Instance_Segmentation Semantic_Segmentation Semi_Global Semi_Supervised Sence_graph Sentiment Sentiment_Classification Sketch SLAM Sparse Speech Speech_Recognition Style_Transfer Summarization Super_Resolution Surveillance Survey Text_Classification Text_Generation Time_Series Tracking Transfer_Learning Transformer Unsupervised Video_Caption Video_Classification Video_Indexing Video_Prediction Video_Retrieval Visual_Relation VQA Weakly_Supervised Zero-Shot