pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2605.03221 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-04 · 💻 cs.CV

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Synthetic Data Generation for Long-Tail Medical Image Classification: A Case Study in Skin Lesions

Jiaxiang Jiang , Mahesh Subedar , Omesh Tickoo
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-08 18:08 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.CV
keywords synthetic data generationdiffusion modelslong-tail classificationskin lesion classificationmedical image analysisdata augmentationISIC2019imbalanced datasets
0
0 comments X

The pith

Diffusion models generate synthetic skin lesion images that improve classification accuracy on rare classes by over 28%.

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

The paper introduces a pipeline that uses diffusion models to create additional training images for medical datasets where some lesion types appear far less often than others. It combines a specialized inpainting diffusion model with an out-of-distribution selection step to produce varied and realistic samples. When tested on the ISIC2019 skin lesion dataset, the augmented training set leads to higher overall accuracy and especially large gains for the least common classes. A reader would care because rare conditions often involve serious diseases, yet standard deep learning models fail on them due to insufficient real examples.

Core claim

The authors develop a diffusion-model-driven synthetic data augmentation pipeline featuring a novel inpainting diffusion model and an OOD post-selection mechanism. Applied to the ISIC2019 skin lesion classification dataset, this pipeline produces diverse, realistic, and clinically meaningful synthetic samples that, when used for training, deliver substantial improvements in overall performance with more than 28% improvement on the class with the fewest samples.

What carries the argument

The inpainting diffusion model combined with an Out-of-Distribution (OOD) post-selection mechanism that generates and filters synthetic images to augment training data for underrepresented classes.

If this is right

  • Overall classification performance on the ISIC2019 skin lesion dataset increases substantially.
  • The largest gains occur on tail classes that have the fewest real samples.
  • The method provides greater variability than handcrafted data augmentation or rebalanced loss functions alone.
  • Diffusion-based augmentation mitigates underperformance on rare medical conditions without requiring new real data collection.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same inpainting-plus-OOD pipeline could extend to other long-tailed medical imaging tasks such as radiology or pathology slides.
  • Widespread adoption might lower the need to collect additional rare real patient scans, easing privacy and logistical burdens.
  • The OOD filter may prove critical for preventing generative artifacts from degrading model safety in clinical settings.
  • Testing the approach on external datasets with different imbalance ratios would reveal how far the gains generalize.

Load-bearing premise

The generated synthetic samples must be realistic and clinically meaningful without artifacts or biases that would mislead the classifier or produce unsafe diagnostic recommendations.

What would settle it

Training the classifier on the augmented ISIC2019 dataset and measuring no accuracy gain or a drop on a held-out set of real images, or clinical experts finding systematic artifacts in the synthetic samples that correlate with increased errors.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.03221 by Jiaxiang Jiang, Mahesh Subedar, Omesh Tickoo.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The overal pipeline of our synthetic data generation approach. First, a segmentation method is used to get background images of view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Inpaint diffusion model finetuning and data generation. First, we finetune an inpainting diffusion model using the original view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Inpaint diffusion model architecture view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Example images (top row) from the dataset and the corresponding synthetic images (bottom row) from our inpaint diffusion view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Ablation study on how γ, the percentage of clean samples affect the final classification performance. Specificity is the least sensitive metric to the hyperparameter. For other three evaluation metrics, the performance significantly improved with even a little amount of synthetic data. Then as γ increases, the performance stays flat or decrease. get improved sharply and then those metrics stay flat or de￾c… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Long-tailed class distributions are pervasive in multi-class medical datasets and pose significant challenges for deep learning models which typically underperform on tail classes with limited samples. This limitation is particularly problematic in medical applications, where rare classes often correspond to severe or high-risk diseases and therefore require high diagnostic accuracy. Existing solutions-including specialized architectures, rebalanced loss functions, and handcrafted data augmentation-offer only marginal improvements and struggle to scale due to their limited and largely deterministic variability. To address these challenges, we introduce a diffusion-model-driven synthetic data augmentation pipeline tailored for medical long-tailed classification. Our approach features a novel inpainting diffusion model combined with an Out-of-Distribution (OOD) post-selection mechanism to ensure diverse, realistic, and clinically meaningful synthetic samples. Evaluated on the ISIC2019 skin lesion classification dataset, one of the largest and most imbalanced medical imaging benchmarks, our method yields substantial improvements in overall performance, with particularly pronounced gains on tail classes with more than $28\%$ improvement on the class with the fewest samples. These results demonstrate the effectiveness of diffusion-based augmentation in mitigating long-tail imbalance and enhancing medical classification robustness.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 0 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a diffusion-based synthetic data augmentation pipeline for long-tailed medical image classification, consisting of an inpainting diffusion model paired with an OOD post-selection filter to generate diverse and realistic samples. Evaluated on the ISIC2019 skin lesion dataset, the method is reported to deliver substantial overall accuracy gains with particularly large improvements (>28%) on the rarest tail class.

Significance. If the central empirical claim holds under rigorous validation, the work offers a practical, scalable route to mitigating class imbalance in medical imaging without additional real-data collection, which could improve diagnostic reliability for rare but clinically critical conditions. The use of a public benchmark and the focus on tail-class metrics are positive aspects of the evaluation design.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and experimental evaluation] The assertion that OOD-filtered inpainted samples are 'clinically meaningful' and drive the reported tail-class gains lacks any described validation (e.g., dermatologist review, lesion-specific fidelity metrics, or artifact analysis). This is load-bearing for the central claim, as OOD filtering based on feature distance or reconstruction error may still admit non-clinical artifacts or spurious correlations that a downstream classifier could exploit (Abstract; experimental evaluation sections).
  2. [Experiments] The manuscript provides no ablation isolating the contribution of the OOD gate versus raw diffusion outputs, no statistical significance tests on the per-class improvements, and incomplete baseline comparisons, leaving the >28% tail-class gain only moderately supported (experimental results).

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed feedback on our manuscript. We have carefully reviewed the major comments and provide point-by-point responses below, along with the revisions we intend to make.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and experimental evaluation] The assertion that OOD-filtered inpainted samples are 'clinically meaningful' and drive the reported tail-class gains lacks any described validation (e.g., dermatologist review, lesion-specific fidelity metrics, or artifact analysis). This is load-bearing for the central claim, as OOD filtering based on feature distance or reconstruction error may still admit non-clinical artifacts or spurious correlations that a downstream classifier could exploit (Abstract; experimental evaluation sections).

    Authors: We agree that the manuscript would benefit from stronger support for the claim of clinical meaningfulness. The OOD post-selection is intended as a quantitative safeguard, using feature-space distance to the real training distribution to exclude samples that deviate substantially from the observed data manifold. While this does not replace clinical review, it reduces the chance of grossly unrealistic artifacts being used for training. To address the concern directly, we will add Fréchet Inception Distance (FID) and perceptual similarity metrics between the filtered synthetic samples and real images, together with a qualitative figure showing representative inpainted outputs and any residual artifacts. We will also revise the abstract and experimental sections to describe the OOD filter more precisely as a distributional plausibility check rather than a clinical validation. These changes will make the supporting evidence for the tail-class gains more transparent. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Experiments] The manuscript provides no ablation isolating the contribution of the OOD gate versus raw diffusion outputs, no statistical significance tests on the per-class improvements, and incomplete baseline comparisons, leaving the >28% tail-class gain only moderately supported (experimental results).

    Authors: We accept that additional experimental controls are needed to substantiate the reported gains. In the revised manuscript we will include a dedicated ablation that trains the downstream classifier on raw diffusion outputs versus OOD-filtered outputs, thereby isolating the contribution of the post-selection step. We will also report statistical significance for the per-class accuracy improvements using bootstrap confidence intervals and a paired test across multiple random seeds. Finally, we will expand the baseline table to encompass additional long-tail methods (e.g., re-sampling, re-weighting, and recent synthetic-augmentation approaches) so that the >28% tail-class improvement can be compared against a fuller set of alternatives. These additions will strengthen the empirical support for the pipeline. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: empirical augmentation pipeline on external benchmark

full rationale

The paper presents a diffusion-model inpainting pipeline with OOD post-selection for synthetic augmentation of long-tailed skin lesion data, evaluated directly on the public ISIC2019 dataset. No equations, fitted parameters, or derivations appear in the abstract or described text that would reduce the reported >28% tail-class gains to inputs by construction. No self-citations are invoked as load-bearing uniqueness theorems or ansatzes; the central claim rests on external empirical measurement rather than self-referential definitions or renamed known results. This is a standard applied ML pipeline whose performance numbers are falsifiable against the fixed public test set.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the domain assumption that diffusion models can produce clinically useful synthetic medical images and that the OOD filter reliably selects beneficial samples; no free parameters or invented entities are explicitly introduced in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Diffusion models conditioned on medical images can generate diverse, realistic, and clinically meaningful synthetic samples.
    This is the foundational premise of the augmentation pipeline.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5506 in / 1182 out tokens · 55345 ms · 2026-05-08T18:08:58.942487+00:00 · methodology

Review history (2 revisions) →

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

38 extracted references · 7 canonical work pages · 4 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Deep resid- ual learning for image recognition,

    K. He, X. Zhang, S. Ren, and J. Sun, “Deep resid- ual learning for image recognition,” inProceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pp. 770–778, 2016. 1

    2016

  2. [2]

    Efficientnet: Rethinking model scaling for convolutional neural networks,

    M. Tan and Q. Le, “Efficientnet: Rethinking model scaling for convolutional neural networks,” inInter- national conference on machine learning, pp. 6105– 6114, PMLR, 2019

    2019

  3. [3]

    An Image is Worth 16x16 Words: Transformers for Image Recognition at Scale

    A. Dosovitskiy, “An image is worth 16x16 words: Transformers for image recognition at scale,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.11929, 2020

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2010

  4. [4]

    A convnet for the 2020s,

    Z. Liu, H. Mao, C.-Y . Wu, C. Feichtenhofer, T. Dar- rell, and S. Xie, “A convnet for the 2020s,” inProceed- ings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pp. 11976–11986, 2022. 1

    2022

  5. [5]

    Monica: Benchmarking on long-tailed medical image classification

    L. Ju, S. Yan, Y . Zhou, Y . Nan, X. Xing, P. Duan, and Z. Ge, “Monica: Benchmarking on long- tailed medical image classification,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.02010, 2024. 1

    work page arXiv 2024

  6. [6]

    Deep long-tailed learning: A survey,

    Y . Zhang, B. Kang, B. Hooi, S. Yan, and J. Feng, “Deep long-tailed learning: A survey,”IEEE trans- actions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, vol. 45, no. 9, pp. 10795–10816, 2023. 1

    2023

  7. [7]

    Learning imbalanced datasets with label- distribution-aware margin loss,

    K. Cao, C. Wei, A. Gaidon, N. Arechiga, and T. Ma, “Learning imbalanced datasets with label- distribution-aware margin loss,”Advances in neural information processing systems, vol. 32, 2019. 1

    2019

  8. [8]

    Disentangling label distribution for long- tailed visual recognition,

    Y . Hong, S. Han, K. Choi, S. Seo, B. Kim, and B. Chang, “Disentangling label distribution for long- tailed visual recognition,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pp. 6626–6636, 2021

    2021

  9. [9]

    Label-imbalanced and group-sensitive clas- sification under overparameterization,

    G. R. Kini, O. Paraskevas, S. Oymak, and C. Thram- poulidis, “Label-imbalanced and group-sensitive clas- sification under overparameterization,”Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 34, pp. 18970–18983, 2021

    2021

  10. [10]

    Focal loss for dense object detection,

    T.-Y . Lin, P. Goyal, R. Girshick, K. He, and P. Doll´ar, “Focal loss for dense object detection,” inProceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vi- sion, pp. 2980–2988, 2017

    2017

  11. [11]

    Bal- anced meta-softmax for long-tailed visual recogni- tion,

    J. Ren, C. Yu, X. Ma, H. Zhao, S. Yi,et al., “Bal- anced meta-softmax for long-tailed visual recogni- tion,”Advances in neural information processing sys- tems, vol. 33, pp. 4175–4186, 2020

    2020

  12. [12]

    Equalization loss for long-tailed object recognition,

    J. Tan, C. Wang, B. Li, Q. Li, W. Ouyang, C. Yin, and J. Yan, “Equalization loss for long-tailed object recognition,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF con- ference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pp. 11662–11671, 2020. 1

    2020

  13. [13]

    Distri- bution alignment: A unified framework for long-tail visual recognition,

    S. Zhang, Z. Li, S. Yan, X. He, and J. Sun, “Distri- bution alignment: A unified framework for long-tail visual recognition,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recogni- tion, pp. 2361–2370, 2021. 1

    2021

  14. [14]

    Explor- ing balanced feature spaces for representation learn- ing,

    B. Kang, Y . Li, S. Xie, Z. Yuan, and J. Feng, “Explor- ing balanced feature spaces for representation learn- ing,” inInternational conference on learning repre- sentations, 2020. 1

    2020

  15. [15]

    Range loss for deep face recognition with long-tailed training data,

    X. Zhang, Z. Fang, Y . Wen, Z. Li, and Y . Qiao, “Range loss for deep face recognition with long-tailed training data,” inProceedings of the IEEE international con- ference on computer vision, pp. 5409–5418, 2017. 1

    2017

  16. [16]

    Sharpness-Aware Minimization for Efficiently Improving Generalization

    P. Foret, A. Kleiner, H. Mobahi, and B. Neyshabur, “Sharpness-aware minimization for efficiently improving generalization,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.01412, 2020. 1

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2010

  17. [17]

    Self supervision to dis- tillation for long-tailed visual recognition,

    T. Li, L. Wang, and G. Wu, “Self supervision to dis- tillation for long-tailed visual recognition,” inPro- ceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, pp. 630–639, 2021. 1

    2021

  18. [18]

    Bbn: Bilateral-branch network with cumulative learning for long-tailed visual recognition,

    B. Zhou, Q. Cui, X.-S. Wei, and Z.-M. Chen, “Bbn: Bilateral-branch network with cumulative learning for long-tailed visual recognition,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pp. 9719–9728, 2020. 1

    2020

  19. [19]

    Skin lesion classification using ensem- bles of multi-resolution efficientnets with meta data,

    N. Gessert, M. Nielsen, M. Shaikh, R. Werner, and A. Schlaefer, “Skin lesion classification using ensem- bles of multi-resolution efficientnets with meta data,” MethodsX, vol. 7, p. 100864, 2020. 2, 4, 5, 6

    2020

  20. [20]

    Building bet- ter deep learning models through dataset fusion: A case study in skin cancer classification with hyper- datasets,

    P. Georgiadis, E. V . Gkouvrikos, E. Vrochidou, T. Kalampokas, and G. A. Papakostas, “Building bet- ter deep learning models through dataset fusion: A case study in skin cancer classification with hyper- datasets,”Diagnostics, vol. 15, no. 3, p. 352, 2025. 1, 5, 6

    2025

  21. [21]

    Multi-category skin lesion diagnosis using dermoscopy images and deep cnn ensembles,

    S. Zhou, Y . Zhuang, and R. Meng, “Multi-category skin lesion diagnosis using dermoscopy images and deep cnn ensembles,”l ´ınea], ISIC Chellange, 2019. 2, 5, 6

    2019

  22. [22]

    Skin lesion clas- sification based on multi-model ensemble with gener- ated levels-of-detail images,

    W.-X. Tsai, Y .-C. Li, and C. H. Lin, “Skin lesion clas- sification based on multi-model ensemble with gener- ated levels-of-detail images,”Biomedical Signal Pro- cessing and Control, vol. 85, p. 105068, 2023. 2, 5, 6

    2023

  23. [23]

    Diffult: Diffu- sion for long-tail recognition without external knowl- edge,

    J. Shao, K. Zhu, H. Zhang, and J. Wu, “Diffult: Diffu- sion for long-tail recognition without external knowl- edge,”Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 37, pp. 123007–123031, 2024. 2, 4

    2024

  24. [24]

    Smote: synthetic minority over- sampling technique,

    N. V . Chawla, K. W. Bowyer, L. O. Hall, and W. P. Kegelmeyer, “Smote: synthetic minority over- sampling technique,”Journal of artificial intelligence research, vol. 16, pp. 321–357, 2002. 2

    2002

  25. [25]

    Learning fast sample re- weighting without reward data,

    Z. Zhang and T. Pfister, “Learning fast sample re- weighting without reward data,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vi- sion, pp. 725–734, 2021

    2021

  26. [26]

    Decoupling representa- tion and classifier for long-tailed recognition,

    B. Kang, S. Xie, M. Rohrbach, Z. Yan, A. Gordo, J. Feng, and Y . Kalantidis, “Decoupling representa- tion and classifier for long-tailed recognition,”arXiv preprint arXiv:1910.09217, 2019. 2

    work page arXiv 1910

  27. [27]

    Cuda: Curriculum of data augmentation for long-tailed recognition,

    S. Ahn, J. Ko, and S.-Y . Yun, “Cuda: Curriculum of data augmentation for long-tailed recognition,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.05499, 2023. 2

    work page arXiv 2023

  28. [28]

    Denoising diffusion probabilistic models,

    J. Ho, A. Jain, and P. Abbeel, “Denoising diffusion probabilistic models,”Advances in neural information processing systems, vol. 33, pp. 6840–6851, 2020. 2

    2020

  29. [29]

    Denoising Diffusion Implicit Models

    J. Song, C. Meng, and S. Ermon, “Denoising diffusion implicit models,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.02502,

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2010

  30. [30]

    High-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models,

    R. Robin, B. Andreas, L. Dominik, E. Patrick, and O. Bj¨orn, “High-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recogni- tion, pp. 10684–10695, 2022. 2, 4

    2022

  31. [31]

    Stable Video Diffusion: Scaling Latent Video Diffusion Models to Large Datasets

    A. Blattmann, T. Dockhorn, S. Kulal, D. Mendele- vitch, M. Kilian, D. Lorenz, Y . Levi, Z. English, V . V o- leti, A. Letts,et al., “Stable video diffusion: Scaling latent video diffusion models to large datasets,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.15127, 2023. 2

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2023

  32. [32]

    Photorealis- tic text-to-image diffusion models with deep language understanding,

    C. Saharia, W. Chan, S. Saxena, L. Li, J. Whang, E. L. Denton, K. Ghasemipour, R. Gontijo Lopes, B. Karagol Ayan, T. Salimans,et al., “Photorealis- tic text-to-image diffusion models with deep language understanding,”Advances in neural information pro- cessing systems, vol. 35, pp. 36479–36494, 2022

    2022

  33. [33]

    Adding condi- tional control to text-to-image diffusion models,

    L. Zhang, A. Rao, and M. Agrawala, “Adding condi- tional control to text-to-image diffusion models,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international confer- ence on computer vision, pp. 3836–3847, 2023. 2

    2023

  34. [34]

    Class-balancing diffusion models,

    Y . Qin, H. Zheng, J. Yao, M. Zhou, and Y . Zhang, “Class-balancing diffusion models,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 18434–18443, 2023. 2, 4, 5, 6

    2023

  35. [35]

    Segment anything in medical images,

    J. Ma, Y . He, F. Li, L. Han, C. You, and B. Wang, “Segment anything in medical images,”Nature Com- munications, vol. 15, no. 1, p. 654, 2024. 2

    2024

  36. [36]

    Me- dianomaly: A comparative study of anomaly detec- tion in medical images,

    Y . Cai, W. Zhang, H. Chen, and K.-T. Cheng, “Me- dianomaly: A comparative study of anomaly detec- tion in medical images,”Medical Image Analysis, p. 103500, 2025. 2, 4

    2025

  37. [37]

    U-net: Con- volutional networks for biomedical image segmen- tation,

    O. Ronneberger, P. Fischer, and T. Brox, “U-net: Con- volutional networks for biomedical image segmen- tation,” inInternational Conference on Medical im- age computing and computer-assisted intervention, pp. 234–241, Springer, 2015. 2

    2015

  38. [38]

    Dreambooth: Fine tuning text- to-image diffusion models for subject-driven genera- tion,

    N. Ruiz, Y . Li, V . Jampani, Y . Pritch, M. Rubinstein, and K. Aberman, “Dreambooth: Fine tuning text- to-image diffusion models for subject-driven genera- tion,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pp. 22500– 22510, 2023. 2, 5, 6

    2023