Shortcut learning occurs when classifiers rely on spurious correlations instead of true diagnostic features. The authors argue that this is essentially a calibration issue: unconstrained training aligns shortcut groups with their prevalence, causing over‑confidence in one group and under‑confidence in another. They introduce two encoder‑agnostic methods—a regularizer and a post‑hoc recalibration—to equalize prevalence across shortcut groups, achieving significant performance gains on chest‑drain‑pneumothorax benchmarks with both fine‑tuned CNNs and frozen foundation‑model backbones.
arXiv:2608. 12086v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vision-language models, such as contrastive language-image pre-training (CLIP)-based approaches, have reached state-of-the-art (SOTA) results in medical artificial intelligence.
MVC-Bench is a new benchmark designed to evaluate the calibration of vision‑language models (VLMs) and medical VLMs (Medical‑VLMs) for medical image classification. It tests calibration across robustness to modality, backbone, and domain shift; effectiveness of calibration strategies and prompt‑tuning methods; and stability under prompt‑template and random‑seed variations. The benchmark includes eight backbones, three medical modalities (fundus imaging, histopathology, chest X‑ray), and compares post‑hoc, train‑time, and zero‑shot calibration approaches, reporting accuracy, Expected Calibration Error (ECE), Maximum Calibration Error (MCE), and Adaptive Calibration Error (ACE) over 1,638 experiments, while also proposing a Multi‑Class Margin (MCM) regularization technique that improves ECE in most settings.
arXiv:2605. 30188v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Reliable probability estimates are critical in many machine learning applications, yet modern classifiers are often poorly calibrated.
arXiv:2607. 14984v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Per-subgroup fairness audits of medical image classifiers face a sample-size problem: minority subgroups in held-out test sets have so few samples that the resulting confidence intervals on per-subgroup performance are wider than the bias the audit is meant to detect.
MVC-Bench is a calibration-focused benchmark for medical vision‑language models, evaluating how well these models express confidence across different modalities, backbones, and domain shifts. It tests robustness to modality, backbone, and domain changes, the effectiveness of calibration and prompt‑tuning strategies, and stability under prompt‑template and random‑seed variations. The benchmark includes 1638 experiments, reporting accuracy and Expected Calibration Error (ECE) along with other calibration metrics, and introduces a simple train‑time calibration method, Multi‑Class Margin (MCM) regularization, that achieves the lowest ECE in most settings.
arXiv:2606. 28654v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Deep Neural Network (DNN) classifiers suffer from poor calibration when their softmax outputs (predictive confidence) deviate from the empirical likelihoods.
arXiv:2608.29419v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Deep learning architectures are increasingly proposed for patient trajectory modeling in electronic health records (EHRs), yet their advantage over s...
arXiv:2509. 19671v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Public datasets of Chest X-Rays (CXRs) have long been a popular benchmark for developing machine learning (ML) computer vision models in healthcare.
arXiv:2607. 16681v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Early sepsis prediction from electronic health records is challenged by irregular sampling, high missingness, and class imbalance.
arXiv:2608.28923v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Data augmentation is a cornerstone of deep learning pipelines, yet existing strategies treat it as a static, model-agnostic preprocessing step, eithe...
arXiv:2608. 13711v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Computer-aided detection (CADe) systems for colonoscopy promise to reduce clinical miss rates, yet reliable real-world deployment remains elusive.
Current evaluation protocols for Vision-Language Models (VLMs) in Radiology Report Generation (RRG) rely on report-level metrics that measure lexical overlap or aggregate clinical correctness. However, such metrics do not test whether individual diagnostic statements stem from the actual pathological evidence visible in the image.