Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 64 references

Weakly Semi-supervised Whole Slide Image Classification by Two-level Cross Consistency Supervision

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read CroCo, a two-branch method with bag-level and instance-level cross-consistency, improves whole slide image classification accuracy when only a small portion of slides are labeled.

desk verdict A practically motivated semi-supervised MIL method for WSIs with solid empirical gains, an overstated novelty claim, and an under-analyzed instance pseudo-label loop. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.12132 v1 pith:TNOFAWJN submitted 2025-04-16 cs.CV

Linhao Qu , Shiman Li , Xiaoyuan Luo , Shaolei Liu , Qinhao Guo , Manning Wang , Zhijian Song This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords classificationproblemwswcimagebagscrocoexistinginstance
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Whole slide images (WSIs) are enormous digital scans of tissue samples, too large for a neural network to process at once. They are usually handled as 'bags': the slide is cut into many small image patches (instances), and the network must predict the slide's label (for example, whether cancer is present) by looking at all patches together. Labeling a slide takes a pathologist 20-30 minutes, so having many unlabeled slides and few labeled ones is common. This paper defines that setting, called WSWC, and proposes CroCo.

CroCo has two branches. One is a bag-based classifier that pools patch features through attention to make a slide prediction. The other is an instance-based classifier that predicts a label for each patch individually and then takes the maximum over patches as the slide prediction. The two branches share the same feature extractor. During training, they cross-supervise each other: on unlabeled slides, each branch's slide-level prediction guides the other branch, and the attention scores from the bag branch serve as soft patch-level targets for the instance branch, which in turn provides patch-level targets for the attention module. On labeled slides, the true slide labels are used, and patches from known negative slides provide clean negative examples.

The authors test CroCo on a synthetic CIFAR-10 bag dataset, Camelyon16 lymph node metastasis, TCGA lung cancer subtype classification, and a clinical cervical cancer prognosis dataset. They report that CroCo outperforms several adapted semi-supervised baselines (Mean Teacher, FixMatch, FreeMatch) in both slide-level and patch-level AUC, especially when only 10-30% of slides are labeled. They also include ablations showing both the two-level consistency and the heterogeneous branches help.

Extended reading notes

Core claim

CroCo enforces bag-level and instance-level cross-consistency between a bag-based attention classifier and an instance-based classifier, and this design achieves better bag and instance classification AUC than adapted Mean Teacher, FixMatch, FreeMatch, and the labeled-only baseline, at 10-50% bag-label ratios across CIFAR-10-MIL, Camelyon16, TCGA-Lung, and the in-house Clinical Cervical dataset (Tables 1-4). The paper also claims this is the first WSWC problem formulation.

Load-bearing premise

The instance-level target for positive bags is entirely self-generated: normalized attention scores from the bag branch are used as pseudo-labels for the instance branch, and the instance branch's predictions are fed back to the attention module (Section 3.4, Eqs. 3-4, Algorithm 1). If these attention scores are noisy or exploit only the easiest positive patches, the mutual supervision loop trains the instance branch on biased targets and may amplify errors. The paper's own 'lazy attention' analysis (Section 4.5) shows such degenerate behavior exists at high positive-instance ratios, and the paper admits it uses no pseudo-label filtering (Conclusion), so this assumption is load-bearing and unverified.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper introduces a new problem setting called Weakly Semi-supervised Whole slide image Classification (WSWC), in which only a small fraction of bags are labeled at the bag level while the remaining bags are unlabeled. The authors propose CroCo, a dual-branch architecture with a bag-based attention classifier and an instance-based classifier that share an encoder. CroCo enforces bag-level and instance-level cross-consistency between the two branches, using attention scores as instance pseudo-labels and instance predictions as attention pseudo-labels. The paper reports bag- and instance-level AUC on one synthetic MIL dataset (CIFAR-10-MIL) and three real datasets (Camelyon16, TCGA-Lung, Clinical Cervical), comparing against adapted Mean Teacher, FixMatch, FreeMatch, and a labeled-only baseline. The main empirical claim is that CroCo outperforms these methods across labeled-data ratios of 10–50% and positive-instance ratios of 1–70%.

Significance. If the empirical claims hold, the WSWC formulation is a useful and clinically motivated problem, and CroCo is a simple, strong baseline for it. The paper provides a reasonably broad evaluation across four datasets and ablates several design choices, including the two consistency levels, the bi-directional supervision, the heterogeneous branches, true-negative instance use, and the shared encoder. These ablations give partial support to the central design. However, the significance is tempered by three issues: the instance-level pseudo-label loop is not validated against ground truth, results are reported as single AUC values without error bars, and the comparison set omits prior semi-supervised MIL/WSI methods that are closest to the proposed setting.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3.4, Eqs. (3)–(4), Algorithm 1, Table 1, §4.5, Conclusion] The instance-level supervision for positive and unlabeled bags is entirely self-generated: normalized attention scores from the bag branch are used as pseudo-labels for the instance branch, and instance-branch predictions are fed back to the attention module (Section 3.4, Eqs. (3)–(4), Algorithm 1). The bag-level CE loss in Eq. (6) does not require the attention distribution to match the true instance distribution, and Table 1 shows that the resulting 'lazy attention' regime is real: at PIR 50% and 70% with full data, bag AUC is 1.0 while instance AUC drops to 0.8224 and 0.7935. The paper argues in Section 4.5 that unlabeled consistency mitigates this laziness, but the mitigation uses the same unfiltered attention scores as targets, and the Conclusion explicitly admits that no pseudo-label filtering is used. The central claim of reliable instance classification therefore rests on an unverified assumption. Please report instance-level pseudo-label AUC against ground truth during training on CIFAR-10-MIL and Camelyon16, and compare CroCo with a variant that filters or thresholds the attention-based pseudo-labels.
  2. [Tables 1–4 and §4.3] All tables report a single AUC per method and setting, with no error bars, confidence intervals, or significance tests. Many reported gaps are small, for example Table 3(a) at 50% labeled data shows CroCo at 0.9462 versus FreeMatch at 0.9415, a difference that could easily fall within run-to-run variability. In addition, the comparison set in Section 4.3 contains only adapted natural-image SSL methods (Mean Teacher, FixMatch, FreeMatch) and the labeled-only baseline; there is no prior semi-supervised MIL or WSI method, such as the works cited as Refs. [58–62], adapted to the WSWC setting. Please add multiple-seed results with standard deviations or confidence intervals, and include at least one existing WSI semi-supervised or MIL-based method as a baseline.
  3. [Tables 3 and 4, §4.7] Tables 3 and 4 report a Full-data column only for CroCo, not for the labeled-only baseline or the adapted SSL methods. The text in Section 4.7 uses the closeness to Full-data as evidence of CroCo's effectiveness, but without Full-data results for the other methods the reader cannot tell whether CroCo closes the label-efficiency gap better than, for example, FreeMatch would at 50% labeled data. Please either add the missing Full-data rows/columns for all comparison methods or remove the comparative 'close to Full-data' claims.
minor comments (6)
  1. [§4.4 and Algorithm 1] The implementation details state that 'Entropy loss is used for model training', while Algorithm 1 and Section 3 define the losses as cross-entropy; please make the terminology consistent.
  2. [Table 2 caption] The caption contains a typo, 'T able 2', and the table is difficult to read because the column boundaries for the labeled-data-ratio groups are not visually separated.
  3. [§3.4] The text first says that 'Algorithm 1 in the Supplementary Materials presents the pseudocode', and then later says 'Algorithm 1 presents the pseudocode' with the algorithm appearing in the main text; please reconcile these references.
  4. [Figure 3C and §4.8] The SVM/linear evaluation in Figure 3C is not described in enough detail; please specify which features are extracted, how the SVM is trained, and whether the instance labels used for training the SVM are the ground-truth labels or the model's pseudo-labels.
  5. [Algorithm 1, total loss] The unsupervised loss weight tau is a free parameter, but its value or selection procedure across datasets is not reported; since the total loss in Algorithm 1 depends linearly on tau, please report the chosen values and the grid used.
  6. [Table 5] In the ablation table, the 'bag cls.→ins cls.' and 'ins cls.→bag cls.' rows are described as applying at both instance and bag levels, which makes the labels ambiguous; please clarify whether the arrow indicates one-directional supervision at both levels, and what is supervised at each level.
Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The method relies on standard MIL assumptions, a convenience assumption that attention scores are instance probabilities, and the assumption that unlabeled bags come from the same distribution. The only tuned free parameter reported is the unsupervised loss weight tau, but its value is not given. No new physical or conceptual entities are introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • tau (unsupervised loss weight) = not reported
    Total loss = Losssup + tau * Lossunsup (Section 3.4, second Algorithm block). tau is selected by grid search on validation set; its value is not given, so it is a tuned hyperparameter that affects the balance between labeled and unlabeled supervision.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption MIL assumption: a positive bag contains at least one positive instance and all instances in negative bags are negative (Eq. 1).
    Stated in Eq. 1 and Section 3.1; standard for WSI MIL.
  • ad hoc to paper Normalized attention scores from the bag-based attention module approximate instance-level positivity probabilities (Eqs. 3-4).
    This is the key modeling assumption behind the instance-level pseudo-labels; it is not proven and the paper's 'lazy attention' analysis shows it is sometimes violated.
  • domain assumption Unlabeled training bags are drawn from the same distribution as labeled and test bags, and the consistency loss prevents degenerate solutions.
    Standard semi-supervised smoothness assumption, referenced in Section 2.2; no explicit verification in the paper.
  • domain assumption Preprocessing (entropy threshold, patch size, magnification) preserves diagnostically relevant tissue.
    Following [30,40]; if background or patch sampling discards informative regions, results change.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Weakly Semi-supervised Whole Slide Image Classification by Two-level Cross Consistency Supervision." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/TNOFAWJN

@misc{pith2026250412132,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Weakly Semi-supervised Whole Slide Image Classification by Two-level Cross Consistency Supervision},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/TNOFAWJN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.12132}
}
read the original abstract

Computer-aided Whole Slide Image (WSI) classification has the potential to enhance the accuracy and efficiency of clinical pathological diagnosis. It is commonly formulated as a Multiple Instance Learning (MIL) problem, where each WSI is treated as a bag and the small patches extracted from the WSI are considered instances within that bag. However, obtaining labels for a large number of bags is a costly and time-consuming process, particularly when utilizing existing WSIs for new classification tasks. This limitation renders most existing WSI classification methods ineffective. To address this issue, we propose a novel WSI classification problem setting, more aligned with clinical practice, termed Weakly Semi-supervised Whole slide image Classification (WSWC). In WSWC, a small number of bags are labeled, while a significant number of bags remain unlabeled. The MIL nature of the WSWC problem, coupled with the absence of patch labels, distinguishes it from typical semi-supervised image classification problems, making existing algorithms for natural images unsuitable for directly solving the WSWC problem. In this paper, we present a concise and efficient framework, named CroCo, to tackle the WSWC problem through two-level Cross Consistency supervision. CroCo comprises two heterogeneous classifier branches capable of performing both instance classification and bag classification. The fundamental idea is to establish cross-consistency supervision at both the bag-level and instance-level between the two branches during training. Extensive experiments conducted on four datasets demonstrate that CroCo achieves superior bag classification and instance classification performance compared to other comparative methods when limited WSIs with bag labels are available. To the best of our knowledge, this paper presents for the first time the WSWC problem and gives a successful resolution.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.12132 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. A. The current paradigm for weakly supervised WSI classification assumes the availability of labels for all training bags. B. In our proposed weakly semi-supervised WSI classification paradigm, only a limited number of labeled training bags are available, while there are numerous unlabeled bags. C. The traditional semi-supervised learning paradigm relies on pseudo-labels and consistency in the domain of natural imag… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Pipeline of our Framework CroCo in processing unlabeled bags. instances from positive bags, multiple methods can be explored to assign them pseudo-labels y˜i,j [12, 32, 33]. The loss function of the instance-level classifier is the cross-entropy between the network prediction ˆyi,j and the pseudo-label ˜yi,j . yˆi,j = φins (zi,j ), zi,j = fins (pi,j ) yi,j =  y˜i,j , if Yi = 1 0, else Loss = CE (yi,j , yˆi,j ) (7) … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The AUC curves of CroCo’s bag-level pseudo labels (A) and instance-level pseudo labels (B) during training. (C) SVM and linear evaluation of extracted features on the Camelyon16 Dataset. Feature Extraction of the Heterogeneous Dual Branches. We further illustrate the efficiency of the heterogeneous dual-branch structure adopted by CroCo from the perspective of features. First, we use the instance-level feature extra… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

64 extracted references · 59 canonical work pages

  1. [62]

    Semi-Supervised Histology Classification using Deep Multiple Instance Learning and Contrastive Predictive Coding

    Lu M Y, Chen R J, Wang J, Dillon D, Mahmood F. Semi-supervised histology classification using deep multiple instance learning and contrastive predictive coding. arXiv preprint arXiv:1910.10825, 2019

    work page Pith review arXiv 1910

  2. [1]

    Qu L, Liu S, Liu X, Wang M, Song Z. Towards label-efficient automatic diagnosis and analysis: a comprehensive survey of advanced deep learning-based weakly-supervised, semi- supervised and self-supervised techniques in histopathological image analysis. Physics in Medicine & Biology, 2022

    work page 2022

  3. [2]

    Deep learning with biopsy whole slide images for pretreatment prediction of pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer: A multicenter study

    Li B, Li F, Liu Z, Xu F, Ye G, Li W, Zhang Y, Zhu T, Shao L, Chen C, others . Deep learning with biopsy whole slide images for pretreatment prediction of pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer: A multicenter study. The Breast, 2022, 66: 183–190

    work page 2022

  4. [3]

    Abstract p2-12-11: Multi-omics fusion for prediction of response to neoadjuvant therapy in breast cancer with external validation

    Li B, Zhu T, Liu Z, Wang K, Tian J. Abstract p2-12-11: Multi-omics fusion for prediction of response to neoadjuvant therapy in breast cancer with external validation. Cancer Research, 2022, 82(4 Supplement): P2–12

    work page 2022

  5. [4]

    Predicting lymph node metastasis from primary cervical squamous cell carcinoma based on deep learning in histopathologic images

    Guo Q, Qu L, Zhu J, Li H, Wu Y, Wang S, Yu M, Wu J, Wen H, Ju X, others . Predicting lymph node metastasis from primary cervical squamous cell carcinoma based on deep learning in histopathologic images. Modern Pathology, 2023, 36(12): 100316

    work page 2023

  6. [5]

    Pathology-knowledge enhanced multi-instance prompt learning for few-shot whole slide image classification

    Qu L, Yang D, Huang D, Guo Q, Luo R, Zhang S, Wang X. Pathology-knowledge enhanced multi-instance prompt learning for few-shot whole slide image classification. In: European Conference on Computer Vision. 2024, 196–212

    work page 2024

  7. [6]

    Deep weakly-supervised learning methods for classification and localization in histology images: a survey

    Rony J, Belharbi S, Dolz J, Ayed I B, McCaffrey L, Granger E. Deep weakly-supervised learning methods for classification and localization in histology images: a survey. arXiv preprint arXiv:1909.03354, 2019

    arXiv 1909

  8. [7]

    Not-so-supervised: a survey of semi-supervised, multi-instance, and transfer learning in medical image analysis

    Cheplygina V, Bruijne d M, Pluim J P. Not-so-supervised: a survey of semi-supervised, multi-instance, and transfer learning in medical image analysis. Medical Image Analysis, 2019, 54: 280–296

    work page 2019

Show all 64 references
  1. [8]

    Pathomic fusion: an integrated framework for fusing histopathology and genomic features for cancer diagnosis and prognosis

    Chen R J, Lu M Y, Wang J, Williamson D F, Rodig S J, Lindeman N I, Mahmood F. Pathomic fusion: an integrated framework for fusing histopathology and genomic features for cancer diagnosis and prognosis. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, 2020, 41(4): 757–770

    2020

  2. [10]

    Data-efficient and weakly supervised computational pathology on whole-slide images

    Lu M Y, Williamson D F, Chen T Y, Chen R J, Barbieri M, Mahmood F. Data-efficient and weakly supervised computational pathology on whole-slide images. Nature Biomedical Engineering, 2021, 5(6): 555–570

    2021

  3. [11]

    The rise of ai language pathologists: Exploring two-level prompt learning for few-shot weakly-supervised whole slide image classification

    Qu L, Fu K, Wang M, Song Z, others . The rise of ai language pathologists: Exploring two-level prompt learning for few-shot weakly-supervised whole slide image classification. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2024, 36 16

    2024

  4. [12]

    Dgmil: Distribution guided multiple instance learning for whole slide image classification

    Qu L, Luo X, Liu S, Wang M, Song Z. Dgmil: Distribution guided multiple instance learning for whole slide image classification. In: Medical Image Computing and Computer Assisted Intervention. 2022, 24–34

    2022

  5. [13]

    Deep multi-instance learning with dynamic pooling

    Yan Y, Wang X, Guo X, Fang J, Liu W, Huang J. Deep multi-instance learning with dynamic pooling. In: Asian Conference on Machine Learning (ACML). 2018, 662–677

    2018

  6. [14]

    Deep neural network models for computational histopathol- ogy: A survey

    Srinidhi C L, Ciga O, Martel A L. Deep neural network models for computational histopathol- ogy: A survey. Medical Image Analysis, 2021, 67: 101813

    2021

  7. [15]

    Weakly-supervised learning for lung carcinoma classification using deep learning

    Kanavati F, Toyokawa G, Momosaki S, Rambeau M, Kozuma Y, Shoji F, Yamazaki K, Takeo S, Iizuka O, Tsuneki M. Weakly-supervised learning for lung carcinoma classification using deep learning. Scientific Reports, 2020, 10(1): 9297

    2020

  8. [16]

    Pseudo-label: The simple and efficient semi-supervised learning method for deep neural networks

    Lee D H, others . Pseudo-label: The simple and efficient semi-supervised learning method for deep neural networks. In: Workshop on Challenges in Representation Learning, ICML. 2013, 896

    2013

  9. [17]

    Uncertainty-aware self-training for text classification with few labels

    Mukherjee S, Awadallah A H. Uncertainty-aware self-training for text classification with few labels. arXiv preprint arXiv:2006.15315, 2020

    2006 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Self-training with noisy student improves imagenet classification

    Xie Q, Luong M T, Hovy E, Le Q V. Self-training with noisy student improves imagenet classification. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). 2020, 10687–10698

    2020

  11. [19]

    S4l: Self-supervised semi-supervised learning

    Zhai X, Oliver A, Kolesnikov A, Beyer L. S4l: Self-supervised semi-supervised learning. 2019 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), 2019, 1476–1485

    2019

  12. [20]

    Unsupervised data augmentation for consistency training

    Xie Q, Dai Z, Hovy E, Luong T, Le Q. Unsupervised data augmentation for consistency training. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2020, 33: 6256– 6268

    2020

  13. [21]

    Mean teachers are better role models: Weight-averaged consistency targets improve semi-supervised deep learning results

    Tarvainen A, Valpola H. Mean teachers are better role models: Weight-averaged consistency targets improve semi-supervised deep learning results. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2017, 30

    2017

  14. [22]

    Temporal ensembling for semi-supervised learning

    Laine S, Aila T. Temporal ensembling for semi-supervised learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:1610.02242, 2016

    2016 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Semi-supervised learning with ladder network

    Rasmus A, Valpola H, Honkala M, Berglund M, Raiko T. Semi-supervised learning with ladder network. ArXiv, 2015, abs/1507.02672

    2015 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Virtual adversarial training: A regularization method for supervised and semi-supervised learning

    Miyato T, Maeda i S, Koyama M, Ishii S. Virtual adversarial training: A regularization method for supervised and semi-supervised learning. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 2017, 41: 1979–1993

    2017

  17. [25]

    Averaging weights leads to wider optima and better generalization

    Izmailov P, Podoprikhin D, Garipov T, Vetrov D P, Wilson A G. Averaging weights leads to wider optima and better generalization. In: Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence. 2018 17

    2018

  18. [26]

    Towards multimodal sentiment analysis debiasing via bias purification

    Yang D, Li M, Xiao D, Liu Y, Yang K, Chen Z, Wang Y, Zhai P, Li K, Zhang L. Towards multimodal sentiment analysis debiasing via bias purification. In: European Conference on Computer Vision. 2024, 464–481

    2024

  19. [27]

    Towards context-aware emotion recognition debiasing from a causal demystification perspective via de-confounded training

    Yang D, Yang K, Kuang H, Chen Z, Wang Y, Zhang L. Towards context-aware emotion recognition debiasing from a causal demystification perspective via de-confounded training. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 2024

    2024

  20. [28]

    Asynchronous multimodal video sequence fusion via learning modality-exclusive and-agnostic representations

    Yang D, Li M, Qu L, Yang K, Zhai P, Wang S, Zhang L. Asynchronous multimodal video sequence fusion via learning modality-exclusive and-agnostic representations. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, 2024

    2024

  21. [29]

    Loss-based attention for deep multiple instance learning

    Shi X, Xing F, Xie Y, Zhang Z, Cui L, Yang L. Loss-based attention for deep multiple instance learning. In: Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI). 2020, 5742–5749

    2020

  22. [30]

    Bi-directional weakly supervised knowledge distillation for whole slide image classification

    Qu L, Luo X, Wang M, Song Z. Bi-directional weakly supervised knowledge distillation for whole slide image classification. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2022, 35: 15368–15381

    2022

  23. [31]

    Accounting for dependencies in deep learning based multiple instance learning for whole slide imaging

    Myronenko A, Xu Z, Yang D, Roth H R, Xu D. Accounting for dependencies in deep learning based multiple instance learning for whole slide imaging. In: Medical Image Computing and Computer Assisted Intervention (MICCAI). 2021, 329–338

    2021

  24. [32]

    Clinical-grade computational pathology using weakly supervised deep learning on whole slide images

    Campanella G, Hanna M G, Geneslaw L, Miraflor A, Werneck Krauss Silva V, Busam K J, Brogi E, Reuter V E, Klimstra D S, Fuchs T J. Clinical-grade computational pathology using weakly supervised deep learning on whole slide images. Nature Medicine, 2019, 25(8): 1301–1309

    2019

  25. [33]

    Multiple instance learning with center embeddings for histopathology classification

    Chikontwe P, Kim M, Nam S J, Go H, Park S H. Multiple instance learning with center embeddings for histopathology classification. In: Medical Image Computing and Computer Assisted Intervention (MICCAI). 2020, 519–528

    2020

  26. [34]

    Camel: A weakly supervised learning framework for histopathology image segmentation

    Xu G, Song Z, Sun Z, Ku C, Yang Z, Liu C, Wang S, Ma J, Xu W. Camel: A weakly supervised learning framework for histopathology image segmentation. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV). 2019, 10682–10691

    2019

  27. [35]

    Interventional multi-instance learning with deconfounded instance-level prediction

    Lin T, Xu H, Yang C, Xu Y. Interventional multi-instance learning with deconfounded instance-level prediction. In: Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI). 2022, 1601–1609

    2022

  28. [36]

    Rethinking multiple instance learning for whole slide image classification: A good instance classifier is all you need

    Qu L, Ma Y, Luo X, Guo Q, Wang M, Song Z. Rethinking multiple instance learning for whole slide image classification: A good instance classifier is all you need. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, 2024

    2024

  29. [37]

    Attention-based deep multiple instance learning

    Ilse M, Tomczak J, Welling M. Attention-based deep multiple instance learning. In: International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML). 2018, 2127–2136

    2018

  30. [38]

    Multi-scale domain-adversarial multiple-instance cnn for cancer subtype classification with unannotated histopathological images

    Hashimoto N, Fukushima D, Koga R, Takagi Y, Ko K, Kohno K, Nakaguro M, Nakamura S, Hontani H, Takeuchi I. Multi-scale domain-adversarial multiple-instance cnn for cancer subtype classification with unannotated histopathological images. In: Proceedings of the 18 IEEE/CVF Confer...

    2020

  31. [39]

    Whole slide images based cancer survival prediction using attention guided deep multiple instance learning networks

    Yao J, Zhu X, Jonnagaddala J, Hawkins N, Huang J. Whole slide images based cancer survival prediction using attention guided deep multiple instance learning networks. Medical Image Analysis, 2020, 65: 101789

    2020

  32. [40]

    Dual-stream multiple instance learning network for whole slide image classification with self-supervised contrastive learning

    Li B, Li Y, Eliceiri K W. Dual-stream multiple instance learning network for whole slide image classification with self-supervised contrastive learning. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). 2021, 14318–14328

    2021

  33. [41]

    Dtfd-mil: Double- tier feature distillation multiple instance learning for histopathology whole slide image classification

    Zhang H, Meng Y, Zhao Y, Qiao Y, Yang X, Coupland S E, Zheng Y. Dtfd-mil: Double- tier feature distillation multiple instance learning for histopathology whole slide image classification. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CV...

    2022

  34. [42]

    Transmil: Transformer based correlated multiple instance learning for whole slide image classification

    Shao Z, Bian H, Chen Y, Wang Y, Zhang J, Ji X, others . Transmil: Transformer based correlated multiple instance learning for whole slide image classification. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2021, 34: 2136–2147

    2021

  35. [43]

    Multimodal co-attention transformer for survival prediction in gigapixel whole slide images

    Chen R J, Lu M Y, Weng W H, Chen T Y, Williamson D F, Manz T, Shady M, Mahmood F. Multimodal co-attention transformer for survival prediction in gigapixel whole slide images. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV). 2021, 4015–4025

    2021

  36. [44]

    Scl-wc: Cross-slide contrastive learning for weakly-supervised whole-slide image classification

    Wang X, Xiang J, Zhang J, Yang S, Yang Z, Wang M H, Zhang J, Yang W, Huang J, Han X. Scl-wc: Cross-slide contrastive learning for weakly-supervised whole-slide image classification. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2022, 35: 18009–18021

    2022

  37. [45]

    Cluster-to-conquer: A framework for end-to-end multi-instance learning for whole slide image classification

    Sharma Y, Shrivastava A, Ehsan L, Moskaluk C A, Syed S, Brown D. Cluster-to-conquer: A framework for end-to-end multi-instance learning for whole slide image classification. In: Medical Imaging with Deep Learning. 2021, 682–698

    2021

  38. [46]

    Interventional bag multi-instance learning on whole-slide pathological images

    Lin T, Yu Z, Hu H, Xu Y, Chen C W. Interventional bag multi-instance learning on whole-slide pathological images. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.06873, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Dual-curriculum contrastive multi-instance learning for cancer prognosis analysis with whole slide images

    Tu C, Zhang Y, Ning Z. Dual-curriculum contrastive multi-instance learning for cancer prognosis analysis with whole slide images. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2022, 35: 29484–29497

    2022

  40. [48]

    Boosting whole slide image classification from the perspectives of distribution, correlation and magnification

    Qu L, Yang Z, Duan M, Ma Y, Wang S, Wang M, Song Z. Boosting whole slide image classification from the perspectives of distribution, correlation and magnification. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision. 2023, 21463– 21473

    2023

  41. [49]

    Wsisa: Making survival prediction from whole slide histopathological images

    Zhu X, Yao J, Zhu F, Huang J. Wsisa: Making survival prediction from whole slide histopathological images. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). 2017, 7234–7242 19

    2017

  42. [50]

    A survey on deep semi-supervised learning

    Yang X, Song Z, King I, Xu Z. A survey on deep semi-supervised learning. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 2022

    2022

  43. [51]

    Semi-supervised classification by low density separation

    Chapelle O, Zien A. Semi-supervised classification by low density separation. In: Interna- tional Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics. 2005

    2005

  44. [52]

    Fixmatch: Simplifying semi-supervised learning with consistency and confidence

    Sohn K, Berthelot D, Carlini N, Zhang Z, Zhang H, Raffel C A, Cubuk E D, Kurakin A, Li C L. Fixmatch: Simplifying semi-supervised learning with consistency and confidence. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2020, 33: 596–608

    2020

  45. [53]

    Simmatch: Semi-supervised learning with similarity matching

    Zheng M, You S, Huang L, Wang F, Qian C, Xu C. Simmatch: Semi-supervised learning with similarity matching. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). 2022, 14471–14481

    2022

  46. [54]

    Class-aware contrastive semi-supervised learning

    Yang F, Wu K, Zhang S, Jiang G, Liu Y, Zheng F, Zhang W, Wang C, Zeng L. Class-aware contrastive semi-supervised learning. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). 2022, 14421–14430

    2022

  47. [55]

    Flexmatch: Boosting semi-supervised learning with curriculum pseudo labeling

    Zhang B, Wang Y, Hou W, Wu H, Wang J, Okumura M, Shinozaki T. Flexmatch: Boosting semi-supervised learning with curriculum pseudo labeling. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2021, 34: 18408–18419

    2021

  48. [56]

    Freematch: Self-adaptive thresholding for semi-supervised learning

    Wang Y, Chen H, Heng Q, Hou W, Savvides M, Shinozaki T, Raj B, Wu Z, Wang J. Freematch: Self-adaptive thresholding for semi-supervised learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.07246, 2022

    2022 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Softmatch: Addressing the quantity-quality trade-off in semi-supervised learning

    Chen H, Tao R, Fan Y, Wang Y, Wang J, Schiele B, Xie X, Raj B, Savvides M. Softmatch: Addressing the quantity-quality trade-off in semi-supervised learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.10921, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Semi-supervised training of deep convolutional neural networks with heterogeneous data and few local annotations: An experiment on prostate histopathology image classification

    Marini N, Ot´ alora S, M¨ uller H, Atzori M. Semi-supervised training of deep convolutional neural networks with heterogeneous data and few local annotations: An experiment on prostate histopathology image classification. Medical Image Analysis, 2021, 73: 102165

    2021

  51. [59]

    Efficient cancer classification by coupling semi supervised and multiple instance learning

    Schmidt A, Silva-Rodr´ ıguez J, Molina R, Naranjo V. Efficient cancer classification by coupling semi supervised and multiple instance learning. IEEE Access, 2022, 10: 9763–9773

    2022

  52. [60]

    Self-supervised driven consistency training for annotation efficient histopathology image analysis

    Srinidhi C L, Kim S W, Chen F D, Martel A L. Self-supervised driven consistency training for annotation efficient histopathology image analysis. Medical Image Analysis, 2022, 75: 102256

    2022

  53. [61]

    Clustering analysis for semi-supervised learning improves classification performance of digital pathology

    Peikari M, Zubovits J, Clarke G, Martel A L. Clustering analysis for semi-supervised learning improves classification performance of digital pathology. In: Machine Learning in Medical Imaging. 2015, 263–270

    2015

  54. [63]

    Learning multiple layers of features from tiny images

    Krizhevsky A, Hinton G, others . Learning multiple layers of features from tiny images. 2009 20

    2009

  55. [64]

    Diagnostic assessment of deep learning algorithms for detection of lymph node metastases in women with breast cancer

    Bejnordi B E, Veta M, Van Diest P J, Van Ginneken B, Karssemeijer N, Litjens G, Van Der Laak J A, Hermsen M, Manson Q F, Balkenhol M, others . Diagnostic assessment of deep learning algorithms for detection of lymph node metastases in women with breast cancer. JAMA, 2017, 318(...

    2017

  56. [65]

    Deep learning for prediction of colorectal cancer outcome: a discovery and validation study

    Skrede O J, De Raedt S, Kleppe A, Hveem T S, Liestøl K, Maddison J, Askautrud H A, Pradhan M, Nesheim J A, Albregtsen F, others . Deep learning for prediction of colorectal cancer outcome: a discovery and validation study. The Lancet, 2020, 395(10221): 350–360 21

    2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.