arXiv Machine Learning

Uncertainty of Vision Medical Foundation Models

The paper investigates how pre‑training strategy, dataset size, and domain affect uncertainty estimation in vision medical foundation models. It compares point‑prediction calibration with conformal (region) prediction across retinal, histopathological, and chest X‑ray models, finding that domain‑specific, self‑supervised pre‑training yields better calibration and more efficient conformal sets. The study shows that standard recalibration alone cannot fully reconcile uncertainty differences between models trained on different data sources.

arXiv Machine Learning
Jul 21

Isotonic Conformal Prediction

arXiv:2607. 16675v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: A point prediction that is well calibrated on average can still be systematically biased conditional on its own value, undermining its use in downstream decision-making.

By Daniel Bensimon, Sean Xiang Yu, Eric D. Kolaczyk, Archer Y. Yang
arXiv Computer Vision
4d ago

A Decision-Aware Evaluation Protocol for Uncertainty in Medical Image Segmentation

The paper introduces a decision‑aware evaluation protocol for medical image segmentation uncertainty that separates uncertainty estimation from deferral policy and assesses their joint performance under fixed review budgets. It reports metrics such as fixed‑budget error reduction, risk‑coverage behavior, region‑level review proxies, structural failure modes, and sensitivity to review assumptions. Experiments on retinal vessel, skin lesion, and polyp segmentation with various backbones and uncertainty estimators show that estimator rankings vary with review unit, uncertainty target, and cost model, and that boundary and thin‑structure failures are partly due to annotation ambiguity.

By Saket Maganti, Shreyank N Gowda
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Aug 27

MVC-Bench: Benchmarking Calibration of Medical Vision-Language Models

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 Computer Vision
Sep 21

Uncertainty-driven training for three-dimensional calibrated lung nodule classification

The paper introduces an uncertainty‑driven training framework for 3D CT lung nodule classification that uses validation‑based uncertainty estimates to reweight the loss, aiming to improve predictive performance and probability calibration. Two uncertainty quantification methods—Monte Carlo Dropout and Evidential Deep Learning—are evaluated across multiple backbone architectures (ResNet, DenseNet, EfficientNet, ViT, Swin) on the LIDC‑IDRI and NoduleMNIST3D datasets. The approach yields comparable classification accuracy to conventional training while substantially reducing expected calibration error, especially on convolutional backbones, and shows that simple temperature scaling can also achieve strong calibration.

By Giuseppe Tripodi, Alessandro De Rosis, Saleh Rezaeiravesh
arXiv Computer Vision
Aug 28

MVC-Bench: Benchmarking Calibration of Medical Vision-Language Models

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.

By Ashshak Sharifdeen, Shihab Aaqil Ahamed, Ufaq Khan, Muhammad Akhtar Munir Sujair Ibrahim, Mohamed Rafeek Mareer Ahamed, Yutong Xie, Imran Razzak, Muhammad Haris Khan