Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 3 cited by

ProjectedEx: Enhancing Generation in Explainable AI for Prostate Cancer

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read ProjectedEx makes counterfactual prostate MRI explanations more realistic.

desk verdict A reasonable StylEx variant for prostate MRI whose FID claim cannot be checked from the paper as written. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.01392 v1 pith:WLVLUYDC submitted 2025-01-02 eess.IV cs.CV

Xuyin Qi , Zeyu Zhang , Aaron Berliano Handoko , Huazhan Zheng , Mingxi Chen , Ta Duc Huy , Vu Minh Hieu Phan , Lei Zhang
show 6 more authors
Linqi Cheng Shiyu Jiang Zhiwei Zhang Zhibin Liao Yang Zhao Minh-Son To
This is my paper · ORCID
classification eess.IVcs.CV
keywords ProjectedExexplainableAIcounterfactualexplanationsprostatecancerMRIStyleSpacefeaturepyramidencodergenerativeadversarialnetworksPI-CAIdataset
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

ProjectedEx is a generative framework that tries to make AI prostate-cancer classification explainable by producing counterfactual MRI explanations: images that look like the patient's scan but are altered just enough to flip or shift a classifier's low-risk/high-risk decision. The paper argues that the standard approach for such explanations, which was designed for natural images, produces unrealistic and clinically murky MRI edits, and that its own modifications fix this. It reports that, on the PI-CAI dataset with DWI, T2WI, and ADC as three channels, ProjectedEx lowers FID relative to the [Re]StylEx baseline for every classifier tested, with the best FID of 108.63 versus 127.08 using EfficientNet-B. If these results hold under matched conditions, the architectural changes—multiscale feature extraction and a logit-conditioned latent space—are a working recipe for closing the realism gap in medical-image explanation.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is a logit-conditioned StyleSpace built from multiscale features. The feature pyramid encoder extracts features at resolutions $64^2$, $32^2$, $16^2$, and $8^2$; each layer passes through a lightweight spectral-normalized discriminator, and all discriminator outputs are brought to a fixed 128-resolution layout and concatenated into 512 dimensions. Adding the classifier's two raw logits gives a 514-dimensional latent code, so the generator is told what decision the regenerated image is supposed to provoke. Differentiable random projections via Cross-Channel Mixing—a randomly initialized $1\times1$ convolution—mixes channels at each scale without needing an invertible rotation matrix. The training loss combines adversarial loss, path regularization, L1 and LPIPS reconstruction, latent-space reconstruction, and KL divergence between classifier outputs, and after training, individual StyleSpace coordinates are iteratively tested to find the ones that move the classifier's logits most.

What would settle it

Retrain [Re]StylEx and ProjectedEx from the same PI-CAI 8:2 split with identical $64\times64$ three-channel DWI/T2WI/ADC inputs, the same batch size, step count, learning-rate schedule, and FID reference statistics; if the FID gap shrinks to zero or reverses, the central claim fails. A second, complementary check: train ProjectedEx with the feature pyramid encoder removed and measure whether the FID returns to baseline levels.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the realism of GAN-based counterfactual explanations for prostate MRI can be substantially improved by upgrading the encoder and the adversarial feedback pathway rather than by changing the explanation logic. Concretely, ProjectedEx replaces a plain encoder with a feature pyramid encoder whose four layers are each scored by a lightweight spectral-normalized discriminator; the outputs are unified to a fixed resolution, concatenated into a 512-dimensional StyleSpace, and then combined with the classifier's two logits to form a 514-dimensional latent code. The paper further replaces rotation-matrix projections with differentiable random projections via a randomly initialized $1\times1$ convolution using a standard weight-initialization scheme. The result, as reported, is consistently lower FID than [Re]StylEx across MobileNetV2, ResNet18, ShuffleNetV2, and EfficientNet-B, with the largest relative improvement on MobileNetV2 and the best absolute FID of 108.63 paired with the best classifier, EfficientNet-B at 83.97% accuracy. On the paper's own terms, this shows that multiscale feedback plus classifier conditioning improves generated explanation quality and that attribute edits in StyleSpace shift classifier logits between low-risk and high-risk categories.

Load-bearing premise

The gap in FID scores assumes the baseline [Re]StylEx was trained and measured under exactly the same protocol as ProjectedEx; because the paper gives training details only for ProjectedEx, differences in data split, preprocessing, training budget, or FID computation could explain the observed improvement.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • ProjectedEx reports lower FID than [Re]StylEx under every classifier tested (178.21 to 117.78 for MobileNetV2, 134.20 to 113.42 for ResNet18, 149.29 to 144.71 for ShuffleNetV2, 127.08 to 108.63 for EfficientNet-B), so the paper's recipe improves generative realism without changing the explanation logic.
  • Because StyleSpace coordinates are found by scanning which latent directions move classifier logits, the framework yields per-attribute counterfactuals: editing the top four attributes flips or shifts images between low-risk and high-risk classifications, which is the ingredient clinicians would inspect.
  • The best FID (108.63) coincides with the strongest classifier (EfficientNet-B, 83.97% accuracy, 91.26% F1), suggesting that explanation quality benefits from pairing with a capable classifier.
  • The loss already includes LPIPS and latent-space reconstruction, so the framework is engineered to preserve patient-specific appearance while editing only decision-relevant attributes, a direct corollary of the reconstruction terms in the objective.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because Cross-Channel Mixing replaces rotation matrices with a randomly initialized $1\times1$ convolution, the same projection trick can likely be dropped into other GAN-based medical explainers without retraining the discriminator stack; that is our extrapolation, not the paper's.
  • The $64\times64$ crop centered on a lesion removes surrounding anatomy, so the method may miss location- or context-dependent cues; a natural test is to apply ProjectedEx at full field of view and compare FID and attribute interpretability.
  • The binary ISUP split puts Gleason 3+4 and 4+3 in different risk classes, so the reported attribute edits reflect coarse risk rather than fine grade; a three- or five-class version could reveal whether the same StyleSpace coordinates remain semantically coherent.
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

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes ProjectedEx, a generative counterfactual explanation framework for prostate cancer MRI classification. The method adapts the StylEx / [Re]StylEx paradigm to medical images by introducing a feature pyramid encoder with multiscale discriminators, differentiable random projections via cross-channel mixing, and a StyleSpace construction that concatenates multiscale features with classifier logits. The authors report classifier performance (accuracy, precision, recall, F1) for four classifiers on the PI-CAI dataset and claim that ProjectedEx consistently outperforms [Re]StylEx in FID across all classifiers, with the best FID of 108.63 paired with EfficientNet-B. The paper includes qualitative visualizations of attribute modifications and discussion of clinical implications.

Significance. If the FID improvement is real and reproducible, the paper offers a useful architectural contribution to medical-image counterfactual explanation: a domain-specific adaptation of StyleGAN-based explainability that improves generation quality for prostate MRI. The use of a public dataset (PI-CAI) and the promise of code release are positive factors. However, the current experimental reporting is insufficient to establish the central quantitative claim, and the paper does not yet demonstrate that the improved FID translates into more interpretable or clinically usable explanations beyond qualitative examples.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section IV.C, Table III] The central claim that ProjectedEx consistently outperforms [Re]StylEx in FID cannot be verified because the FID computation protocol is not specified. It is unclear whether FID is computed on reconstructions, on attribute-edited counterfactual images, or on both; which real-image set serves as the reference distribution; how many samples are used; and which Inception feature layer is employed. This matters because ProjectedEx is trained to reconstruct x with L1, LPIPS, and latent-space losses, so a FID computed on near-identity reconstructions would be artificially low and would not measure the quality of counterfactual explanations. Please report the exact protocol and, ideally, separate FID values for reconstructions and counterfactual edits.
  2. [Section IV.B] No training configuration is given for the [Re]StylEx baseline. The comparison is meaningful only if the baseline is trained and evaluated under identical conditions: the same PI-CAI train/test split, the same 64x64 three-channel preprocessing, the same training budget (number of steps, learning rate, batch size), and the same attribute budget. Only ProjectedEx details are provided. Please supply the baseline configuration for every classifier row in Table III, or a precise pointer to the implementation and hyperparameters used.
  3. [Section IV.C, Table III] The reported FID values are single numbers with no error bars, no repeated-run variance, and no statistical test. This is particularly important for the ShuffleNetv2 row, where the difference is 149.29 versus 144.71 (about 3%), so measurement noise could change the qualitative conclusion. Please report means and standard deviations over multiple seeds, or bootstrap confidence intervals, for the FID comparison.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Section IV.C] The text says 'three classifiers: MobileNetv2, ResNet18, ShuffleNetv2 and EfficientNet-B', but four classifiers are listed; please correct to 'four classifiers'.
  2. [Section IV.C] The paragraph discussing FID results refers to 'Table II', but the FID results are presented in Table III; the cross-reference should be corrected.
  3. [Section IV.A] The subsection title 'Evaluation Matrices' should be 'Evaluation Metrics'.
  4. [Section IV.A] The PI-CAI dataset is used but no reference or URL is provided; please add a citation for the dataset.
  5. [Section V] The conclusion claims 'state-of-the-art results', but the only empirical comparison is against [Re]StylEx; no comparison is made to other medical-image counterfactual explanation methods, such as the chest X-ray StylEx adaptation cited in the related work, so the 'state-of-the-art' wording overstates the evidence.
  6. [Section III.D] The loss notation is slightly inconsistent: Lrec is said to include Lx_rec, LLPIPS, and Lw_rec, but Lx_rec and Lw_rec are not defined in the equation block; please clarify the notation.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Attribute explanation is circular: the StyleSpace literally contains the classifier logits, and Lcls forces generated images to match those logits, so 'discovering' attributes that change the classifier is guaranteed by construction.

  1. self definitional [Section III.D (StyleSpace Construction and Loss Function) and Section III.E (Extracting Attributes)]
    "This feature vector is then combined with the two logits from the classifier, resulting in a 514-dimensional representation referred to as the StyleSpace. By providing the generator with the intended classifier output values for the generated images, this conditioning mechanism ensures that the StyleSpace captures attributes relevant to the classifier’s decision-making process. As a result, the coordinates in the StyleSpace become an affine transformation of the classifier output, embedding more attributes that influence the classifier’s predictions. ..."

    The StyleSpace is constructed by concatenating the latent feature vector with the two classifier logits, so the classifier output is itself a coordinate of the space in which attributes are later sought. Training with Lcls = DKL[C(x')|C(x)] forces the generator to produce images whose classifier output matches the conditioning logits. Therefore, when Section III.E searches for StyleSpace coordinates that 'when adjusted, increase the probability of the target class,' the coordinate corresponding to the target-class logit is guaranteed to work by construction.

full rationale

The FID comparison in Section IV.C is not circular: ProjectedEx is compared against the external [Re]StylEx baseline, no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and the FID gap is not built into the training objective by construction. The related-work self-citations (refs 10-24) are background and not load-bearing. However, the paper's interpretability contribution does reduce by construction. ProjectedEx explicitly includes the two classifier logits in its 514-dimensional StyleSpace and trains the generator with a classifier-consistency loss, so the later attribute-extraction step that 'discovers' coordinates affecting classifier predictions is guaranteed for the logit coordinates. This makes the explanation mechanism self-definitional: the explanatory attributes are partly the classifier output itself, rather than independent image features discovered to influence it. The score reflects that one central claim (the meaningfulness of the extracted StyleSpace attributes as explanations) is circular, while the FID and classifier-accuracy results retain independent empirical content.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim relies on the external PI-CAI dataset, the StylEx/StyleGAN framework, and the ISUP grading consensus as domain inputs. No explicit fitted constants are introduced; all hyperparameters are conventional. The attribution of improvements to architectural changes is an empirical claim, not a derivation.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Three MRI modalities (DWI, T2WI, ADC) can be treated as an RGB-like three-channel input.
    Section IV.C describes stacking modalities as channels for model input.
  • domain assumption Binary ISUP risk grouping (Gleason <= 3+4 low-risk, else high-risk) is a valid classification target for explanation.
    Section IV.A defines the binary scheme used to train the classifier.
  • domain assumption FID is an acceptable proxy for explanation quality and clinical relevance.
    Section IV.A selects FID as the generative metric; no human or clinical evaluation is performed.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of ProjectedEx: Enhancing Generation in Explainable AI for Prostate Cancer." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WLVLUYDC

@misc{pith2026250101392,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: ProjectedEx: Enhancing Generation in Explainable AI for Prostate Cancer},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WLVLUYDC}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.01392}
}
read the original abstract

Prostate cancer, a growing global health concern, necessitates precise diagnostic tools, with Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) offering high-resolution soft tissue imaging that significantly enhances diagnostic accuracy. Recent advancements in explainable AI and representation learning have significantly improved prostate cancer diagnosis by enabling automated and precise lesion classification. However, existing explainable AI methods, particularly those based on frameworks like generative adversarial networks (GANs), are predominantly developed for natural image generation, and their application to medical imaging often leads to suboptimal performance due to the unique characteristics and complexity of medical image. To address these challenges, our paper introduces three key contributions. First, we propose ProjectedEx, a generative framework that provides interpretable, multi-attribute explanations, effectively linking medical image features to classifier decisions. Second, we enhance the encoder module by incorporating feature pyramids, which enables multiscale feedback to refine the latent space and improves the quality of generated explanations. Additionally, we conduct comprehensive experiments on both the generator and classifier, demonstrating the clinical relevance and effectiveness of ProjectedEx in enhancing interpretability and supporting the adoption of AI in medical settings. Code will be released at https://github.com/Richardqiyi/ProjectedEx

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.01392 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Visualization of three MRI modalities (T2WI, DWI, ADC) and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The architecture diagram illustrating the interactions between the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. A feature pyramid encoder extracts multiscale features from four [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Visualization of the effect of attributes on classifier logits (T2WI). [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Visualization of the effect of attributes on classifier logits (ADC). [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. SSS: Semi-Supervised SAM-2 with Efficient Prompting for Medical Imaging Segmentation

    cs.CV 2025-06 reject novelty 4.0 of 10

    SSS applies SAM-2 with a Discriminative Feature Enhancement mechanism and a physical-constraint sliding-window prompt generator, reporting Dice scores of 53.15 on BHSD and 89.34 to 91.21 on ACDC.

  2. A Novel Convolutional-Free Method for 3D Medical Imaging Segmentation

    eess.IV 2025-02 reject novelty 3.0 of 10

    The paper proposes a convolution-free transformer pipeline and a thick-to-thin joint loss but reports no experiments and no performance numbers.

  3. MedConv: Convolutions Beat Transformers on Long-Tailed Bone Density Prediction

    cs.CV 2025-02 reject novelty 3.0 of 10

    A 3D ResNet with reweighted loss and logit adjustment reaches 65.38% accuracy on a private 389-patient CT dataset for three-class T-score prediction.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 22 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Epidemiology of prostate cancer,

    Prashanth Rawla, “Epidemiology of prostate cancer,” World journal of oncology, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 63, 2019

    work page 2019

  2. [2]

    The utility of magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer diagnosis in the australian setting,

    Jia Ying Isaac Tay, Ken Chow, Dominic J Gavin, Evie Mertens, Nicholas Howard, Benjamin Thomas, Philip Dundee, Justin Peters, Paul Simkin, Sevastjan Kranz, et al., “The utility of magnetic resonance imaging in prostate cancer diagnosis in the australian setting,” BJUI compass, vol. 2, no. 6, pp. 377–384, 2021

    work page 2021

  3. [3]

    Diffusion-weighted imaging in prostate cancer,

    Tsutomu Tamada, Yu Ueda, Yoshiko Ueno, Yuichi Kojima, Ayumu Kido, and Akira Yamamoto, “Diffusion-weighted imaging in prostate cancer,” Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine , pp. 1–15, 2021

    work page 2021

  4. [4]

    Tumor area highlighting using t2wi, adc map, and dwi sequence fusion on bpmri images for better prostate cancer diagnosis,

    Rossy Vl ˘adut, Teic˘a, Mircea-Sebastian S, erb˘anescu, Lucian Mihai Flo- rescu, and Ioana Andreea Gheonea, “Tumor area highlighting using t2wi, adc map, and dwi sequence fusion on bpmri images for better prostate cancer diagnosis,” Life, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 910, 2023

    work page 2023

  5. [5]

    Prostate imaging reporting and data system (pi-rads), version 2: a critical look,

    Andrew B Rosenkrantz, Aytekin Oto, Baris Turkbey, and Antonio C Westphalen, “Prostate imaging reporting and data system (pi-rads), version 2: a critical look,” American Journal of Roentgenology , vol. 206, no. 6, pp. 1179–1183, 2016

    work page 2016

  6. [6]

    Exploring the efficacy of multi-flavored feature extraction with radiomics and deep features for prostate cancer grading on mpmri,

    Hasan Khanfari, Saeed Mehranfar, Mohsen Cheki, Mahmoud Moham- madi Sadr, Samir Moniri, Sahel Heydarheydari, and Seyed Masoud Rezaeijo, “Exploring the efficacy of multi-flavored feature extraction with radiomics and deep features for prostate cancer grading on mpmri,” BMC Medical Imaging , vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 195, 2023

    work page 2023

  7. [7]

    Recent advances in explainable artificial intelligence for magnetic resonance imaging,

    Jinzhao Qian, Hailong Li, Junqi Wang, and Lili He, “Recent advances in explainable artificial intelligence for magnetic resonance imaging,” Diagnostics, vol. 13, no. 9, pp. 1571, 2023

    work page 2023

  8. [8]

    Explaining in style: Training a gan to explain a classifier in stylespace,

    Oran Lang, Yossi Gandelsman, Michal Yarom, Yoav Wald, Gal Elidan, Avinatan Hassidim, William T Freeman, Phillip Isola, Amir Globerson, Michal Irani, et al., “Explaining in style: Training a gan to explain a classifier in stylespace,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision , 2021, pp. 693–702

    work page 2021

Show all 40 references
  1. [9]

    A style-based generator architecture for generative adversarial networks,

    Tero Karras, Samuli Laine, and Timo Aila, “A style-based generator architecture for generative adversarial networks,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2019, pp. 4401–4410

    2019

  2. [10]

    A landmark-based approach for instability predic- tion in distal radius fractures,

    Yang Zhao, Zhibin Liao, Yunxiang Liu, Koen Oude Nijhuis, Britt Barvelink, Jasper Prijs, Joost Colaris, Mathieu Wijffels, Max Reijman, Zeyu Zhang, et al., “A landmark-based approach for instability predic- tion in distal radius fractures,” in 2024 IEEE International Symposium o...

    2024

  3. [11]

    Can rotational thromboelastometry rapidly identify theragnostic targets in isolated traumatic brain injury?,

    Abhiram D Hiwase, Christopher D Ovenden, Lola M Kaukas, Mark Finnis, Zeyu Zhang, Stephanie O’Connor, Ngee Foo, Benjamin Reddi, Adam J Wells, and Daniel Y Ellis, “Can rotational thromboelastometry rapidly identify theragnostic targets in isolated traumatic brain injury?,” Emerg...

    2024

  4. [12]

    Jointvit: Modeling oxygen saturation levels with joint supervision on long-tailed octa,

    Zeyu Zhang, Xuyin Qi, Mingxi Chen, Guangxi Li, Ryan Pham, Ayub Qassim, Ella Berry, Zhibin Liao, Owen Siggs, Robert Mclaughlin, et al., “Jointvit: Modeling oxygen saturation levels with joint supervision on long-tailed octa,” in Annual Conference on Medical Image Understand- in...

    2024

  5. [13]

    Esa: Annotation-efficient active learning for semantic segmentation,

    Jinchao Ge, Zeyu Zhang, Minh Hieu Phan, Bowen Zhang, Akide Liu, and Yang Zhao, “Esa: Annotation-efficient active learning for semantic segmentation,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.13491 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Meddet: Generative adversarial distillation for efficient cervical disc herniation detection,

    Zeyu Zhang, Nengmin Yi, Shengbo Tan, Ying Cai, Yi Yang, Lei Xu, Qingtai Li, Zhang Yi, Daji Ergu, and Yang Zhao, “Meddet: Generative adversarial distillation for efficient cervical disc herniation detection,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.00204 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Msdet: Receptive field enhanced multiscale detection for tiny pulmonary nodule,

    Guohui Cai, Ying Cai, Zeyu Zhang, Daji Ergu, Yuanzhouhan Cao, Binbin Hu, Zhibin Liao, and Yang Zhao, “Msdet: Receptive field enhanced multiscale detection for tiny pulmonary nodule,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.14028, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Medical ai for early detection of lung cancer: A survey,

    Guohui Cai, Ying Cai, Zeyu Zhang, Yuanzhouhan Cao, Lin Wu, Daji Ergu, Zhinbin Liao, and Yang Zhao, “Medical ai for early detection of lung cancer: A survey,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.14769 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Bhsd: A 3d multi-class brain hemorrhage segmentation dataset,

    Biao Wu, Yutong Xie, Zeyu Zhang, Jinchao Ge, Kaspar Yaxley, Suzan Bahadir, Qi Wu, Yifan Liu, and Minh-Son To, “Bhsd: A 3d multi-class brain hemorrhage segmentation dataset,” in International Workshop on Machine Learning in Medical Imaging . Springer, 2023, pp. 147–156

    2023

  10. [18]

    Segreg: Segmenting oars by registering mr images and ct annotations,

    Zeyu Zhang, Xuyin Qi, Bowen Zhang, Biao Wu, Hien Le, Bora Jeong, Zhibin Liao, Yunxiang Liu, Johan Verjans, Minh-Son To, et al., “Segreg: Segmenting oars by registering mr images and ct annotations,” in 2024 IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI) . IEEE, 2024...

    2024

  11. [19]

    Segstitch: Multidimensional transformer for robust and efficient medical imaging segmentation,

    Shengbo Tan, Zeyu Zhang, Ying Cai, Daji Ergu, Lin Wu, Binbin Hu, Pengzhang Yu, and Yang Zhao, “Segstitch: Multidimensional transformer for robust and efficient medical imaging segmentation,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.00496 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Thin-thick adapter: Segmenting thin scans using thick annotations,

    Zeyu Zhang, Bowen Zhang, Abhiram Hiwase, Christen Barras, Feng Chen, Biao Wu, Adam James Wells, Daniel Y Ellis, Benjamin Reddi, Andrew William Burgan, Minh-Son To, Ian Reid, and Richard Hartley, “Thin-thick adapter: Segmenting thin scans using thick annotations,” OpenReview, 2023

    2023

  13. [21]

    Segkan: High-resolution medical image segmentation with long-distance depen- dencies,

    Shengbo Tan, Rundong Xue, Shipeng Luo, Zeyu Zhang, Xinran Wang, Lei Zhang, Daji Ergu, Zhang Yi, Yang Zhao, and Ying Cai, “Segkan: High-resolution medical image segmentation with long-distance depen- dencies,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.19990 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  14. [22]

    A deep learning approach to diabetes diagnosis,

    Zeyu Zhang, Khandaker Asif Ahmed, Md Rakibul Hasan, Tom Gedeon, and Md Zakir Hossain, “A deep learning approach to diabetes diagnosis,” in Asian Conference on Intelligent Information and Database Systems . Springer, 2024, pp. 87–99

    2024

  15. [23]

    Sine activated low-rank matrices for parameter efficient learning,

    Yiping Ji, Hemanth Saratchandran, Cameron Gordon, Zeyu Zhang, and Simon Lucey, “Sine activated low-rank matrices for parameter efficient learning,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.19243 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Xlip: Cross-modal attention masked modelling for medical language-image pre-training,

    Biao Wu, Yutong Xie, Zeyu Zhang, Minh Hieu Phan, Qi Chen, Ling Chen, and Qi Wu, “Xlip: Cross-modal attention masked modelling for medical language-image pre-training,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.19546, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Inception-v3 for flower classi- fication,

    Xiaoling Xia, Cui Xu, and Bing Nan, “Inception-v3 for flower classi- fication,” in 2017 2nd international conference on image, vision and computing (ICIVC). IEEE, 2017, pp. 783–787

    2017

  18. [26]

    Transfer learning using vgg-16 with deep convolu- tional neural network for classifying images,

    Srikanth Tammina, “Transfer learning using vgg-16 with deep convolu- tional neural network for classifying images,” International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications (IJSRP) , vol. 9, no. 10, pp. 143– 150, 2019

    2019

  19. [27]

    A transfer learning approach for classification of clinical signif- icant prostate cancers from mpmri scans,

    Quan Chen, Xiang Xu, Shiliang Hu, Xiao Li, Qing Zou, and Yunpeng Li, “A transfer learning approach for classification of clinical signif- icant prostate cancers from mpmri scans,” in Medical Imaging 2017: Computer-Aided Diagnosis. SPIE, 2017, vol. 10134, pp. 1154–1157

    2017

  20. [28]

    Deep-learning-based artificial intelligence for pi-rads classification to assist multiparametric prostate mri interpretation: a development study,

    Thomas Sanford, Stephanie A Harmon, Evrim B Turkbey, Deepak Kesani, Sena Tuncer, Manuel Madariaga, Chris Yang, Jonathan Sackett, Sherif Mehralivand, Pingkun Yan, et al., “Deep-learning-based artificial intelligence for pi-rads classification to assist multiparametric prostate ...

    2020

  21. [29]

    [re] explaining in style: Training a gan to explain a classifier in stylespace,

    Noah Van der Vleuten, Tadija Radusinovi ´c, Rick Akkerman, and Meilina Reksoprodjo, “[re] explaining in style: Training a gan to explain a classifier in stylespace,” in ML Reproducibility Challenge 2021 (Fall Edition), 2021

    2021

  22. [30]

    Chexplaining in style: Counterfactual explanations for chest x-rays using stylegan,

    Matan Atad, Vitalii Dmytrenko, Yitong Li, Xinyue Zhang, Matthias Keicher, Jan Kirschke, Bene Wiestler, Ashkan Khakzar, and Nassir Navab, “Chexplaining in style: Counterfactual explanations for chest x-rays using stylegan,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2207.07553 , 2022

    2022 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Analyzing and improving the image quality of stylegan,

    Tero Karras, Samuli Laine, Miika Aittala, Janne Hellsten, Jaakko Lehtinen, and Timo Aila, “Analyzing and improving the image quality of stylegan,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , 2020, pp. 8110–8119

    2020

  24. [32]

    Prostate cancer histology synthesis using stylegan latent space annotation,

    Gagandeep B Daroach, Savannah R Duenweg, Michael Brehler, Alli- son K Lowman, Kenneth A Iczkowski, Kenneth M Jacobsohn, Josiah A Yoder, and Peter S LaViolette, “Prostate cancer histology synthesis using stylegan latent space annotation,” in International Conference on Medical ...

    2022

  25. [33]

    Delving deep into rectifiers: Surpassing human-level performance on imagenet classification,

    Kaiming He, Xiangyu Zhang, Shaoqing Ren, and Jian Sun, “Delving deep into rectifiers: Surpassing human-level performance on imagenet classification,” in Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision, 2015, pp. 1026–1034

    2015

  26. [34]

    Gen- erative adversarial nets,

    Ian Goodfellow, Jean Pouget-Abadie, Mehdi Mirza, Bing Xu, David Warde-Farley, Sherjil Ozair, Aaron Courville, and Yoshua Bengio, “Gen- erative adversarial nets,” Advances in neural information processing systems, vol. 27, 2014

    2014

  27. [35]

    The unreasonable effectiveness of deep features as a perceptual metric,

    Richard Zhang, Phillip Isola, Alexei A Efros, Eli Shechtman, and Oliver Wang, “The unreasonable effectiveness of deep features as a perceptual metric,” in Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2018, pp. 586–595

    2018

  28. [36]

    International society of urological pathology (isup) grading of prostate cancer–an isup consensus on contemporary grading,

    Lars Egevad, Brett Delahunt, John R Srigley, and Hemamali Sama- ratunga, “International society of urological pathology (isup) grading of prostate cancer–an isup consensus on contemporary grading,” 2016

    2016

  29. [37]

    Mobilenetv2: Inverted residuals and linear bottlenecks,

    Mark Sandler, Andrew Howard, Menglong Zhu, Andrey Zhmoginov, and Liang-Chieh Chen, “Mobilenetv2: Inverted residuals and linear bottlenecks,” in Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , 2018, pp. 4510–4520

    2018

  30. [38]

    Deep residual learning for image recognition,

    Kaiming He, Xiangyu Zhang, Shaoqing Ren, and Jian 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. [39]

    Shufflenet v2: Practical guidelines for efficient cnn architecture design,

    Ningning Ma, Xiangyu Zhang, Hai-Tao Zheng, and Jian Sun, “Shufflenet v2: Practical guidelines for efficient cnn architecture design,” in Proceedings of the European conference on computer vision (ECCV) , 2018, pp. 116–131

    2018

  32. [40]

    Efficientnet: Rethinking model scaling for convolutional neural networks,

    Mingxing Tan and Quoc Le, “Efficientnet: Rethinking model scaling for convolutional neural networks,” in International conference on machine learning. PMLR, 2019, pp. 6105–6114

    2019

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.