REVIEW 1 cited by
CoCa-CXR: Contrastive Captioners Learn Strong Temporal Structures for Chest X-Ray Vision-Language Understanding
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Vision-language models have proven to be of great benefit for medical image analysis since they learn rich semantics from both images and reports. Prior efforts have focused on better alignment of image and text representations to enhance image understanding. However, though explicit reference to a prior image is common in Chest X-Ray (CXR) reports, aligning progression descriptions with the semantics differences in image pairs remains under-explored. In this work, we propose two components to address this issue. (1) A CXR report processing pipeline to extract temporal structure. It processes reports with a large language model (LLM) to separate the description and comparison contexts, and extracts fine-grained annotations from reports. (2) A contrastive captioner model for CXR, namely CoCa-CXR, to learn how to both describe images and their temporal progressions. CoCa-CXR incorporates a novel regional cross-attention module to identify local differences between paired CXR images. Extensive experiments show the superiority of CoCa-CXR on both progression analysis and report generation compared to previous methods. Notably, on MS-CXR-T progression classification, CoCa-CXR obtains 65.0% average testing accuracy on five pulmonary conditions, outperforming the previous state-of-the-art (SOTA) model BioViL-T by 4.8%. It also achieves a RadGraph F1 of 24.2% on MIMIC-CXR, which is comparable to the Med-Gemini foundation model.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
CXR-ContraBench: Benchmarking Negated-Option Attraction in Medical VLMs
Medical VLMs frequently select negated options that contradict visible chest X-ray findings, achieving only ~30% accuracy on direct presence probes, but a post-hoc consistency verifier raises accuracy above 95%.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.