Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 7 minor 1 cited by

PriorPath: Coarse-To-Fine Approach for Controlled De-Novo Pathology Semantic Masks Generation

T0 review · 4 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read PriorPath claims that conditioning a pix2pix image-translation model on coarse tissue-region masks yields fine-grained pathology masks that are closer to real masks and cover more of the real semantic-mask space than the noise-driven…

desk verdict A plausible and clearly written coarse-to-fine conditional mask generation method with a real evaluation gap: the headline comparison conditions on target-derived coarse masks and never quantifies the manual sketches that motivate the whole approach. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.16515 v2 pith:DIAZEUWU submitted 2024-11-25 eess.IV cs.CV

Nati Daniel , May Nathan , Eden Azeroual , Yael Fisher , Yonatan Savir This is my paper · ORCID
classification eess.IVcs.CV
keywords DeepLearningHistopathologyImageGenerationTranslationRepresentationTissueMaskConditionalGANsCoarse-to-fineModecollapse
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

The paper's target is a controllable generator for de-novo histopathology semantic masks: instead of drawing the mask from random noise, PriorPath starts from a coarse binary sketch of tissue regions and translates it into a fine-grained mask with a pix2pix conditional GAN. It reports that this coarse-to-fine route gives masks closer to real histopathology masks and wider coverage of the real mask distribution than the noise-driven DCGAN and DEPAS baselines, with FID dropping, for example, from 198.704 to 71.246 on prostate adenocarcinoma. The same masks feed a pix2pixHD stage that produces photorealistic RGB histopathology images, so one platform can specify tissue layout and get both a mask and an image. If these results hold, the method gives pathologists a practical control input for synthetic data generation in data-scarce pathology settings.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing element is the paired coarse-to-fine mask translation task. Real binary masks are degraded by morphological opening with a 5x5 kernel followed by closing with a 10x10 kernel to create coarse priors, so the conditioning input carries the true tissue layout while a pix2pix generator, an image-to-image conditional GAN with a U-Net generator and patch-based discriminator, fills in fine structure using a conditional adversarial loss plus an L1 loss. The coarse mask is the controllability handle; the paper chooses pix2pix over CycleGAN after comparing FID, then uses pix2pixHD in the second stage for RGB synthesis.

What would settle it

Run the trained PriorPath generator on handmade coarse sketches that were not derived from real masks, compute FID and t-SNE coverage against real masks, and compare with Table 2; if the FID degrades toward the DEPAS or DCGAN range or the masks cluster in a small region of the t-SNE space, the controllability and diversity claims would not hold for the intended use case.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that a coarse-to-fine conditional translation setup, named PriorPath, generates synthetic fine-grained tissue masks with better similarity to real masks and wider coverage of the mask space than de-novo noise-based generators. Paired coarse masks are derived from real fine masks by morphological opening with a 5x5 kernel and closing with a 10x10 kernel, and a pix2pix generator learns the coarse-to-fine map. On all four datasets PriorPath improves FID over both DCGAN and DEPAS, and its KS and KL distances are also lower than DEPAS on all four datasets. The generated masks are additionally translated to photorealistic RGB images with pix2pixHD, which the paper presents as a single controllable platform for synthetic histopathology.

Load-bearing premise

The whole quantitative story is based on coarse masks created by fixed morphological operations on the real fine masks, not on the hand-drawn sketches that a pathologist would actually use, so if real user sketches fall outside the learned coarse-mask distribution, the reported similarity and coverage numbers may not carry over to practice.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A user can control where tissue appears by drawing or editing a coarse region mask, and obtain a fine mask that is quantitatively closer to real masks than DEPAS outputs.
  • The generated masks cover more of the real semantic-mask space than DEPAS, relieving the mode collapse that t-SNE visualization shows for noise-based generation.
  • The full pipeline yields photorealistic RGB histopathology images from the same coarse input, so synthetic data can include paired semantic labels and images.
  • These masks and images could supply training data for computational pathology models in settings where annotated data are scarce or imbalanced.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Editorial inference: the coverage gain may be driven less by pix2pix specifically than by conditioning on inputs that are themselves drawn from the real mask distribution; a diffusion model or another conditional generator trained on the same paired data might show a similar effect.
  • Editorial inference: a direct test of the intended use case would be to ask pathologists to sketch masks from memory or from clinical expectations, feed only those sketches through the generator, and measure both FID and downstream segmentation performance; the paper's manual sketches are shown but not quantitatively scored.
  • Editorial inference: because training coarse masks are morphological shrunken versions of real masks, the model has effectively seen the fine answer; out-of-distribution coarse sketches may produce fine masks whose glandular or architectural details are unrealistic even if the global layout is correct.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 7 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents PriorPath, a pipeline for generative modeling of binary tissue semantic masks in digital pathology. The key idea is to condition an image-to-image translation model (pix2pix) on a coarse-grained semantic mask that specifies tissue regions, and to train on pairs generated by applying morphological opening and closing to real fine-grained masks. The resulting fine masks are then fed to pix2pixHD to produce synthetic RGB histopathology images. The authors compare PriorPath against unconditional DCGAN and DEPAS baselines on four datasets, reporting lower FID, KL, and KS scores, and argue that conditioning on coarse masks alleviates mode collapse while retaining similarity to real masks.

Significance. If the reported gains were obtained under a fair comparison, PriorPath would be a practical and conceptually valuable contribution to controllable synthetic histopathology data generation, with a straightforward architecture that could be adopted by other groups. The idea is clearly presented and the method has a clear use case. However, the current evaluation is not sufficient to establish the central claims: the test-time coarse masks are derived from the ground-truth fine masks that serve as the comparison targets, and the alternative scenario of manual user-provided coarse masks is never quantitatively evaluated. As a consequence, the paper's significance in its present form is mainly algorithmic rather than demonstrated.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 3.2, Table 2 with Section 2.3] The evaluation protocol makes the comparison structurally favorable to PriorPath. The coarse masks used as inputs are obtained by applying morphological opening (5×5) and closing (10×10) to the very real fine masks that then serve as the FID, KL, and KS targets (Section 2.3). An ideal model that simply re-sharpens its input would already score well on these metrics, while the DCGAN and DEPAS baselines receive no information about the target. To support the de-novo generation claim, the authors should either (i) compare PriorPath with unconditional baselines that are given the same coarse masks as auxiliary input, (ii) evaluate on coarse masks that are not derived from the evaluation targets (e.g., held-out hand-drawn sketches), or (iii) demonstrate that the FID improvement persists when the test-time coarse masks are drawn from a distribution that does not include the target mask's own morphological transform.
  2. [Section 2.4] The practical controllability claim rests on manual coarse masks, but these are never quantitatively assessed. Roughly 100 raw binary sketches per cancer type were created, yet no FID/KL/KS values are reported for fine masks generated from them, and there is no analysis showing that these sketches lie in the same coarse-mask distribution as the morphologically derived masks used in training. Without such evidence, the reader cannot know whether the diversity and similarity advantages reported in Table 2 transfer to real pathologist input. Please provide quantitative results on the manual sketches, or at least a distributional comparison (e.g., a distance metric between the manual and morphological coarse-mask sets).
  3. [Table 2, Section 3.2] The quantitative comparison lacks any measure of uncertainty. All FID, KL, and KS values are reported as point estimates, with no error bars, confidence intervals, or significance testing. FID is known to be sensitive to sample size and feature extraction details, and the KL/KS computation depends on the discretization of the mask distribution, which is not described. Please report the evaluation protocol (number of samples, how FID features are pooled, the binning used for KL/KS) and provide bootstrap confidence intervals or repeated-run estimates.
  4. [Section 3.3] The photorealistic RGB image stage is evaluated only qualitatively. If the full pipeline claim ('photorealistic masks and images within a single platform') is to be supported, a quantitative assessment is necessary, for example FID on the RGB image space or a blinded expert evaluation. This would also help verify that the fine masks produced by PriorPath are actually suitable for the downstream image translation step.
minor comments (7)
  1. [Figure 1 caption] The label 'DEAPS' in the caption for panel (b) is a typo; the method is called DEPAS elsewhere.
  2. [Table 2 caption] 'ProirPath' is a typo for 'PriorPath'.
  3. [Abstract] The abstract states that the method was demonstrated on three cancer types, but Table 1 lists four datasets (PRAD, SKCM, LUSC, and NSCLC). Please clarify whether the abstract refers to organs or datasets.
  4. [Section 2.5] The description of pix2pix's generator input as 'noise z' is misleading; in the standard formulation pix2pix uses dropout rather than an explicit noise vector, and the equations in (2) and (3) do not show how z is incorporated. Please correct the notation and the generator definition.
  5. [References] References [39] and [43] both refer to the pix2pixHD paper; please merge them.
  6. [Section 2.8] The loss function description mentions feature-matching losses, but the final objective is not written down. Please specify the total loss explicitly, including the weighting of the feature-matching terms.
  7. [Section 2.3] The choice of kernel sizes (5×5 opening, 10×10 closing) and the threshold values in Section 2.1 appear to be fixed ad hoc parameters; please state whether they were tuned and how sensitive the results are to them.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No load-bearing circularity: the coarse priors are derived from the real masks, which advantages PriorPath, but the coarse-to-fine prediction is not identical to its input by construction.

full rationale

The paper's core pipeline is a standard pix2pix conditional image-to-image translation from coarse masks to fine masks, trained on pairs created by morphologically opening and closing the real fine masks (Section 2.3). At test time, PriorPath receives a smoothed version of the target fine mask and is then compared with that same fine mask in Table 2 (FID, KS, KL). This gives the method a structural advantage over noise-conditioned DCGAN and DEPAS, and the claimed 'coverage of the semantic mask space' is partly inherited from the target-derived input distribution rather than demonstrated for arbitrary user priors. However, this is an evaluation-design limitation, not a circular derivation: the model must still synthesize the fine-scale structure removed by the morphological filter, and no fitted parameter from the test targets is fed into the model. The manually drawn pathologist sketches described in Section 2.4 are never quantitatively scored, so the de-novo controllability claim is not independently validated; that is a missing-support issue rather than a circular step. The DEPAS baseline is from the same research group, but it is used as a published external comparison system, not as a load-bearing self-citation that justifies the method's correctness. Overall, the reported outputs are not equivalent to the inputs by construction, and the paper does not reduce to a self-citation chain.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on hand-selected preprocessing thresholds and kernel sizes, on the assumption that target-derived coarse masks represent user input, and on metric choices that are not validated against downstream pathology tasks. No new physical or architectural entities are introduced.

free parameters (5)
  • H&E tissue/air threshold = 204 (0-255 grayscale)
    Used to derive ground-truth binary masks in Section 2.1; chosen without sensitivity analysis, and every FID, KL, and KS score inherits this choice.
  • IHC tissue/air threshold = 235 (0-255 grayscale)
    Used to derive ground-truth masks for the NSCLC PD-L1 dataset; no robustness check is reported.
  • Opening kernel size = 5x5 pixels
    Defines the coarse mask used as conditional input in Section 2.3; no ablation shows the result is robust to this choice.
  • Closing kernel size = 10x10 pixels
    Second morphological operation that defines the coarse masks; no sensitivity analysis is provided.
  • K-means cluster count = Unspecified, chosen by visual evaluation
    Used in Section 2.4 to organize manual mask drawing; the actual number is not reported, so this part of the pipeline is not reproducible.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Grayscale thresholds correctly identify tissue versus background in H&E and IHC patches.
    Ground-truth masks for training and evaluation depend on Section 2.1 thresholding; no pathologist validation of the binary masks is reported.
  • domain assumption Morphological opening and closing produce valid coarse masks and well-specified paired training data.
    Section 2.3 assumes these coarse masks retain the tissue layout needed for the pix2pix translation task and that the pair distribution matches how users will draw masks.
  • domain assumption FID, KS, and KL on binary tissue masks reflect clinically relevant similarity.
    Section 2.2 uses these metrics without evidence that they correlate with diagnostic usefulness or downstream segmentation performance.
  • domain assumption Manual pathologist sketches lie on the learned coarse-mask manifold.
    Section 2.4 describes manual sketches, but no quantitative evaluation shows that the model translates them as well as it translates morphological coarse masks.
  • domain assumption DCGAN and DEPAS baselines were trained under comparable conditions on the same data splits.
    Table 2 comparisons assume fair training; no checkpoints, seeds, or training protocols are released for the baselines.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of PriorPath: Coarse-To-Fine Approach for Controlled De-Novo Pathology Semantic Masks Generation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DIAZEUWU

@misc{pith2026241116515,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: PriorPath: Coarse-To-Fine Approach for Controlled De-Novo Pathology Semantic Masks Generation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DIAZEUWU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.16515}
}
read the original abstract

Incorporating artificial intelligence (AI) into digital pathology offers promising prospects for automating and enhancing tasks such as image analysis and diagnostic processes. However, the diversity of tissue samples and the necessity for meticulous image labeling often result in biased datasets, constraining the applicability of algorithms trained on them. To harness synthetic histopathological images to cope with this challenge, it is essential not only to produce photorealistic images but also to be able to exert control over the cellular characteristics they depict. Previous studies used methods to generate, from random noise, semantic masks that captured the spatial distribution of the tissue. These masks were then used as a prior for conditional generative approaches to produce photorealistic histopathological images. However, as with many other generative models, this solution exhibits mode collapse as the model fails to capture the full diversity of the underlying data distribution. In this work, we present a pipeline, coined PriorPath, that generates detailed, realistic, semantic masks derived from coarse-grained images delineating tissue regions. This approach enables control over the spatial arrangement of the generated masks and, consequently, the resulting synthetic images. We demonstrated the efficacy of our method across three cancer types, skin, prostate, and lung, showcasing PriorPath's capability to cover the semantic mask space and to provide better similarity to real masks compared to previous methods. Our approach allows for specifying desired tissue distributions and obtaining both photorealistic masks and images within a single platform, thus providing a state-of-the-art, controllable solution for generating histopathological images to facilitate AI for computational pathology.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.16515 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Analysis and Illustration of Generative Approaches for High-Resolution Binary Semantic Masks of Tissue [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Examples of PriorPath tissue mask generation compered with DEPAS. These figures show examples of four [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Illustration of PriorPath results, demonstrating the benefits of controlling the distribution while preserving [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Full pipeline photorealistic results. Samples of fine-grain tissue masks and their corresponding histopathologi [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. CSG: A Context-Semantic Guided Diffusion Approach in De Novo Musculoskeletal Ultrasound Image Generation

    cs.CV 2024-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    CSG generates musculoskeletal ultrasound images by jointly conditioning a latent diffusion model on anatomical masks and style-matched context images, reporting improved segmentation Dice scores and lower FID than a s...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

43 extracted references · 25 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    T. R. Kiehl, Digital and Computational Pathology: A Specialty Reimagined . Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2022, pp. 227–250. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99838-7_12

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-030-99838-7_12 2022

  2. [2]

    Classification of melanocytic lesions in selected and whole-slide images via convolutional neural networks,

    S. N. Hart, W. Flotte, F. Andrew, K. K. Shah, Z. R. Buchan, T. Mounajjed, T. J. Flotteet al., “Classification of melanocytic lesions in selected and whole-slide images via convolutional neural networks,” Journal of Pathology Informatics, vol. 10, no. 1, p. 5, 2019

    work page 2019

  3. [3]

    Segmentation methods of h&e-stained histological images of lymphoma: a review,

    T. A. A. Tosta, L. A. Neves, and M. Z. do Nascimento, “Segmentation methods of h&e-stained histological images of lymphoma: a review,”Informatics in medicine unlocked, vol. 9, pp. 35–43, 2017

    work page 2017

  4. [4]

    A deep learning algorithm for one-step contour aware nuclei segmentation of histopathology images,

    Y . Cui, G. Zhang, Z. Liu, Z. Xiong, and J. Hu, “A deep learning algorithm for one-step contour aware nuclei segmentation of histopathology images,” Medical & biological engineering & computing , vol. 57, no. 9, pp. 2027–2043, 2019

    work page 2027

  5. [5]

    A deep learning approach for semantic segmenta- tion in histology tissue images,

    J. Wang, J. D. MacKenzie, R. Ramachandran, and D. Z. Chen, “A deep learning approach for semantic segmenta- tion in histology tissue images,” inInternational Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention. Springer, 2016, pp. 176–184

    work page 2016

  6. [6]

    Deep learning in big image data: Histology image classification for breast cancer diagnosis,

    V . Kovalev, A. Kalinovsky, and V . Liauchuk, “Deep learning in big image data: Histology image classification for breast cancer diagnosis,” in Big Data and Advanced Analytics, Proc. 2nd International Conference, BSUIR, Minsk. sn, 2016, pp. 44–53

    work page 2016

  7. [7]

    Using deep learning to enhance cancer diagnosis and classification,

    R. Fakoor, F. Ladhak, A. Nazi, and M. Huber, “Using deep learning to enhance cancer diagnosis and classification,” in Proceedings of the international conference on machine learning, vol. 28. ACM, New York, USA, 2013, pp. 3937–3949

    work page 2013

  8. [8]

    High-resolution breast cancer screening with multi-view deep convolutional neural networks,

    K. J. Geras, S. Wolfson, Y . Shen, N. Wu, S. Kim, E. Kim, L. Heacock, U. Parikh, L. Moy, and K. Cho, “High-resolution breast cancer screening with multi-view deep convolutional neural networks,”arXiv preprint arXiv:1703.07047, 2017

    arXiv 2017

Show all 43 references
  1. [9]

    Precision histology: how deep learning is poised to revitalize histomorphology for personalized cancer care,

    U. Djuric, G. Zadeh, K. Aldape, and P. Diamandis, “Precision histology: how deep learning is poised to revitalize histomorphology for personalized cancer care,” NPJ precision oncology, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1–5, 2017

    2017

  2. [10]

    Harnessing artificial intelligence to infer novel spatial biomarkers for the diagnosis of eosinophilic esophagitis,

    A. Larey, E. Aknin, N. Daniel, G. A. Osswald, J. M. Caldwell, M. Rochman, T. Wasserman, M. H. Collins, N. C. Arva, G.-Y . Yanget al., “Harnessing artificial intelligence to infer novel spatial biomarkers for the diagnosis of eosinophilic esophagitis,” Frontiers in Medicine, vo...

    2022

  3. [11]

    Machine learning approach for biopsy-based identification of eosinophilic esophagitis reveals importance of global features,

    T. Czyzewski, N. Daniel, M. Rochman, J. M. Caldwell, G. A. Osswald, M. H. Collins, M. E. Rothenberg, and Y . Savir, “Machine learning approach for biopsy-based identification of eosinophilic esophagitis reveals importance of global features,” IEEE open journal of engineering i...

    2021

  4. [12]

    A deep multi-label segmentation network for eosinophilic esophagitis whole slide biopsy diagnostics,

    N. Daniel, A. Larey, E. Aknin, G. A. Osswald, J. M. Caldwell, M. Rochman, M. H. Collins, G.-Y . Yang, N. C. Arva, K. E. Capocelli, M. E. Rothenberg, and Y . Savir, “A deep multi-label segmentation network for eosinophilic esophagitis whole slide biopsy diagnostics,” in 2022 44...

    2022

  5. [13]

    Deep learning for digital pathology image analysis: A comprehensive tutorial with selected use cases,

    A. Janowczyk and A. Madabhushi, “Deep learning for digital pathology image analysis: A comprehensive tutorial with selected use cases,” Journal of pathology informatics, vol. 7, no. 1, p. 29, 2016

    2016

  6. [14]

    Deep learning in medical image analysis,

    D. Shen, G. Wu, and H.-I. Suk, “Deep learning in medical image analysis,” Annual review of biomedical engineering, vol. 19, p. 221, 2017

    2017

  7. [15]

    Harnessing artificial intelligence to infer novel spatial biomarkers for the diagnosis of eosinophilic esophagitis,

    A. Larey, E. Aknin, N. Daniel, G. A. Osswald, J. M. Caldwell, M. Rochman, T. Wasserman, M. H. Collins, N. C. Arva, G.-Y . Yang, M. E. Rothenberg, and Y . Savir, “Harnessing artificial intelligence to infer novel spatial biomarkers for the diagnosis of eosinophilic esophagitis,...

    2022

  8. [16]

    Translational ai and deep learning in diagnostic pathology,

    A. Serag, A. Ion-Margineanu, H. Qureshi, R. McMillan, M.-J. Saint Martin, J. Diamond, P. O’Reilly, and P. Hamilton, “Translational ai and deep learning in diagnostic pathology,”Frontiers in medicine, vol. 6, p. 185, 2019

    2019

  9. [17]

    Artificial intelligence and digital pathology: challenges and opportunities,

    H. R. Tizhoosh and L. Pantanowitz, “Artificial intelligence and digital pathology: challenges and opportunities,” Journal of pathology informatics, vol. 9, no. 1, p. 38, 2018

    2018

  10. [18]

    Pathologygan: Learning deep representations of cancer tissue,

    A. C. Quiros, R. Murray-Smith, and K. Yuan, “Pathologygan: Learning deep representations of cancer tissue,” in Medical Imaging with Deep Learning. PMLR, 2020, pp. 669–695. 10 PriorPath: Controlled De-Novo Pathology Semantic Masks Generation DANIEL N ET AL

    2020

  11. [19]

    Between generating noise and generating images: Noise in the correct frequency improves the quality of synthetic histopathology images for digital pathology,

    N. Daniel, E. Aknin, A. Larey, Y . Peretz, G. Sela, Y . Fisher, and Y . Savir, “Between generating noise and generating images: Noise in the correct frequency improves the quality of synthetic histopathology images for digital pathology,” in 2023 45th Annual International Conf...

    2023

  12. [20]

    Generative adversarial networks for pre-training of medical image segmentation networks,

    K. Chen, M. Wang, and Z. Song, “Generative adversarial networks for pre-training of medical image segmentation networks,” Research Square, 2020

    2020

  13. [21]

    Synthetic medical images from dual generative adversarial networks,

    J. T. Guibas, T. S. Virdi, and P. S. Li, “Synthetic medical images from dual generative adversarial networks,”arXiv preprint arXiv:1709.01872, 2017

    2017 arXiv

  14. [22]

    High resolution histopathology image generation and segmentation through adversarial training,

    W. Li, J. Li, J. Polson, Z. Wang, W. Speier, and C. Arnold, “High resolution histopathology image generation and segmentation through adversarial training,” Medical Image Analysis, vol. 75, p. 102251, 2022

    2022

  15. [23]

    Generative adversarial networks,

    I. Goodfellow, J. Pouget-Abadie, M. Mirza, B. Xu, D. Warde-Farley, S. Ozair, A. Courville, and Y . Bengio, “Generative adversarial networks,”Communications of the ACM, vol. 63, no. 11, pp. 139–144, 2020

    2020

  16. [24]

    Unsupervised representation learning with deep convolutional generative adversarial networks,

    A. Radford, L. Metz, and S. Chintala, “Unsupervised representation learning with deep convolutional generative adversarial networks,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1511.06434, 2015

    2015 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Depas: De-novo pathology semantic masks using a generative model,

    A. Larey, N. Daniel, E. Aknin, Y . Fisher, and Y . Savir, “Depas: De-novo pathology semantic masks using a generative model,” in 2023 45th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine & Biology Society (EMBC). IEEE, 2023, pp. 1–7

    2023

  18. [26]

    Review the cancer genome atlas (tcga): an immeasurable source of knowledge,

    K. Tomczak, P. Czerwi´nska, and M. Wiznerowicz, “Review the cancer genome atlas (tcga): an immeasurable source of knowledge,” Contemporary Oncology/Współczesna Onkologia, vol. 2015, no. 1, pp. 68–77, 2015

    2015

  19. [27]

    Pd-l1 expression in human cancers and its association with clinical outcomes,

    X. Wang, F. Teng, L. Kong, and J. Yu, “Pd-l1 expression in human cancers and its association with clinical outcomes,” OncoTargets and therapy, vol. 9, p. 5023, 2016

    2016

  20. [28]

    Gans trained by a two time-scale update rule converge to a local nash equilibrium,

    M. Heusel, H. Ramsauer, T. Unterthiner, B. Nessler, and S. Hochreiter, “Gans trained by a two time-scale update rule converge to a local nash equilibrium,”Advances in neural information processing systems, vol. 30, 2017

    2017

  21. [29]

    Evaluating kolmogorov’s distribution,

    G. Marsaglia, W. W. Tsang, and J. Wang, “Evaluating kolmogorov’s distribution,”Journal of statistical software, vol. 8, pp. 1–4, 2003

    2003

  22. [30]

    A. W. Bowman and A. Azzalini, Applied smoothing techniques for data analysis: the kernel approach with S-Plus illustrations. OUP Oxford, 1997, vol. 18

    1997

  23. [32]

    Unpaired image-to-image translation using cycle-consistent adversarial networks,

    J.-Y . Zhu, T. Park, P. Isola, and A. A. Efros, “Unpaired image-to-image translation using cycle-consistent adversarial networks,” in Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision, 2017, pp. 2223– 2232

    2017

  24. [33]

    Labelme: Image polygonal annotation with python

    Kentaro Wada, “Labelme: Image polygonal annotation with python.” [Online]. Available: https://github. com/wkentaro/labelme

  25. [34]

    Medibang inc,

    M. Inc, “Medibang inc,” mediBang Paint - the free digital painting and manga creation software. [Online]. Available: https://medibangpaint.com/en/

  26. [35]

    Samsung penup

    SAMSUNG, “Samsung penup.” [Online]. Available: https://www.samsung.com/global/galaxy/apps/ pen%-up/

  27. [36]

    Conditional generative adversarial nets,

    M. Mirza and S. Osindero, “Conditional generative adversarial nets,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1411.1784, 2014

    2014 arXiv

  28. [37]

    Medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention–miccai 2015,

    A. Frangi, “Medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention–miccai 2015,” in Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Direct Science, 2015

    2015

  29. [38]

    Image-to-image translation with conditional adversarial networks,

    P. Isola, J.-Y . Zhu, T. Zhou, and A. A. Efros, “Image-to-image translation with conditional adversarial networks,” in Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2017, pp. 1125–1134

    2017

  30. [40]

    Deep residual learning for image recognition,

    K. He, X. Zhang, S. Ren, and J. Sun, “Deep residual learning for image recognition,” in Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2016, pp. 770–778

    2016

  31. [41]

    Pytorch: An imperative style, high-performance deep learning library,

    A. Paszke, S. Gross, F. Massa, A. Lerer, J. Bradbury, G. Chanan, T. Killeen, Z. Lin, N. Gimelshein, L. Antiga et al., “Pytorch: An imperative style, high-performance deep learning library,”Advances in neural information processing systems, vol. 32, 2019. 11 PriorPath: Controll...

    2019

  32. [42]

    Adam: A method for stochastic optimization,

    D. P. Kingma and J. Ba, “Adam: A method for stochastic optimization,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6980, 2014

    2014 arXiv

  33. [43]

    High-resolution image synthesis and semantic manipulation with conditional gans,

    T.-C. Wang, M.-Y . Liu, J.-Y . Zhu, A. Tao, J. Kautz, and B. Catanzaro, “High-resolution image synthesis and semantic manipulation with conditional gans,” in Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2018, pp. 8798–8807

    2018

  34. [44]

    Synthesis of diagnostic quality cancer pathology images by generative adversarial networks,

    A. B. Levine, J. Peng, D. Farnell, M. Nursey, Y . Wang, J. R. Naso, H. Ren, H. Farahani, C. Chen, D. Chiuet al., “Synthesis of diagnostic quality cancer pathology images by generative adversarial networks,” The Journal of pathology, vol. 252, no. 2, pp. 178–188, 2020

    2020

  35. [45]

    A morphology focused diffusion probabilistic model for synthesis of histopathology images,

    P. A. Moghadam, S. Van Dalen, K. C. Martin, J. Lennerz, S. Yip, H. Farahani, and A. Bashashati, “A morphology focused diffusion probabilistic model for synthesis of histopathology images,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF winter conference on applications of computer vision, 202...

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.