REVIEW 1 cited by
The Performance of Transferability Metrics does not Translate to Medical Tasks
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Transfer learning boosts the performance of medical image analysis by enabling deep learning (DL) on small datasets through the knowledge acquired from large ones. As the number of DL architectures explodes, exhaustively attempting all candidates becomes unfeasible, motivating cheaper alternatives for choosing them. Transferability scoring methods emerge as an enticing solution, allowing to efficiently calculate a score that correlates with the architecture accuracy on any target dataset. However, since transferability scores have not been evaluated on medical datasets, their use in this context remains uncertain, preventing them from benefiting practitioners. We fill that gap in this work, thoroughly evaluating seven transferability scores in three medical applications, including out-of-distribution scenarios. Despite promising results in general-purpose datasets, our results show that no transferability score can reliably and consistently estimate target performance in medical contexts, inviting further work in that direction.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Robustness of transferability estimation metrics for medical imaging
Transferability estimation metric rankings in medical imaging are unstable to target resampling and to the evaluation metric used for the reference ranking.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.