pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.00927 · v1 · pith:X4TQVNKEnew · submitted 2026-05-30 · 💻 cs.CV

Bridging Topology and Deep Representation Learning: A TDA-ViT Fusion Model for Four-Class Brain Tumor Classification

Faisal Ahmed This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-28 18:40 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.CV
keywords topological data analysisvision transformerbrain tumor classificationMRIfeature fusionmedical image analysisgliomameningioma
0
0 comments X

The pith

Fusing topological descriptors with Vision Transformer features yields 99.10% accuracy on four-class brain tumor MRI classification.

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

The paper proposes a fusion model that extracts topological descriptors via TDA to capture geometric structure, connectivity, and shape from MRI scans while a pretrained ViT learns semantic representations from the same images. These two feature sets are combined into a single representation for classifying glioma, meningioma, pituitary tumor, and non-tumor cases on the BRISC2025 dataset. The authors report that this combination produces 99.10% accuracy, 99.27% precision, 99.15% recall, 99.21% F1-score, and 99.98% AUC, outperforming ResNet50, ResNet101, EfficientNetB2, and standalone ViTs. A reader would care because the work tests whether topological information supplies details that standard transformer models miss in medical imaging tasks. The central claim is that the fused representation is more discriminative than either component alone.

Core claim

The TDA-ViT fusion model extracts complementary topological descriptors that capture geometric structure, connectivity, and shape information from MRI images in parallel with high-level semantic representations from a pretrained ViT; fusing these spaces produces a unified representation that achieves 99.10% accuracy, 99.27% precision, 99.15% recall, 99.21% F1-score, and 99.98% AUC on the four-class BRISC2025 dataset while outperforming ResNet50, ResNet101, EfficientNetB2, and standalone Vision Transformers.

What carries the argument

The TDA-ViT fusion framework, which merges topological descriptors extracted by TDA with pretrained ViT semantic features to form a single input for the classifier.

If this is right

  • Topological features supply information that improves classification performance over using either TDA or ViT alone.
  • The fused model produces higher accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, and AUC than ResNet50, ResNet101, EfficientNetB2, and standalone ViTs on the BRISC2025 dataset.
  • The approach yields a more robust framework for automated four-class brain tumor classification from MRI.
  • Topological descriptors enhance deep representation learning by adding geometric and connectivity details.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same fusion strategy could be tested on other MRI-based tasks such as tumor segmentation or multi-modal imaging to check whether complementarity persists.
  • If the gain holds on independent datasets, the method might reduce reliance on very large training sets by injecting explicit structural priors.
  • Comparing TDA persistence diagrams or Betti numbers directly against ViT attention maps could reveal which tumor shape properties the transformer currently under-represents.

Load-bearing premise

Topological descriptors from TDA supply information that is genuinely complementary to ViT representations rather than redundant or noise.

What would settle it

An ablation experiment that trains the identical ViT pipeline without the TDA branch and measures no statistically significant drop in accuracy, precision, recall, or AUC on the BRISC2025 dataset.

read the original abstract

Accurate brain tumor classification from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a key requirement for early diagnosis and clinical decision-making. Vision Transformers (ViTs) have shown strong performance in medical image analysis by learning global contextual representations, but they often fail to capture intrinsic structural and topological patterns present in tumor regions. To address this limitation, we propose a fusion framework that combines Topological Data Analysis (TDA) features with pretrained Vision Transformer representations for four-class brain tumor classification. In the proposed method, TDA is used to extract complementary topological descriptors that capture geometric structure, connectivity, and shape information from MRI images. In parallel, a pretrained ViT model learns high-level semantic representations from the same images. These two feature spaces are then fused to form a unified and more discriminative representation for classification. The model is evaluated on the BRISC2025 dataset, which contains four brain tumor classes: glioma, meningioma, pituitary tumor, and non-tumor cases. Experimental results show that combining topological and transformer-based features significantly improves performance compared to using either approach alone. The proposed TDA-ViT fusion model achieves an accuracy of 99.10%, precision of 99.27%, recall of 99.15%, F1-score of 99.21%, and an AUC of 99.98%. It also outperforms several state-of-the-art models, including ResNet50, ResNet101, EfficientNetB2, and standalone Vision Transformers. These results demonstrate that topological features provide valuable complementary information that enhances deep representation learning, leading to a robust and highly accurate framework for automated brain tumor classification.

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

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a TDA-ViT fusion framework that extracts topological descriptors via TDA and semantic features via a pretrained Vision Transformer, fuses them, and classifies four brain tumor classes (glioma, meningioma, pituitary, non-tumor) on the BRISC2025 MRI dataset. It reports 99.10% accuracy, 99.27% precision, 99.15% recall, 99.21% F1-score and 99.98% AUC, claiming these metrics demonstrate that topological features supply complementary information that significantly outperforms standalone TDA, standalone ViT, ResNet50, ResNet101, EfficientNetB2 and other baselines.

Significance. If the complementarity claim were supported by controlled ablations on identical splits, the result would provide concrete evidence that topological invariants add non-redundant signal to transformer representations in medical imaging, a finding that could influence hybrid TDA-DL pipelines. The current manuscript supplies no such controls, so the headline numbers cannot yet be attributed to the proposed fusion mechanism rather than dataset characteristics or capacity increases.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the statement that fusion 'significantly improves performance compared to using either approach alone' and that topological features supply 'valuable complementary information' is load-bearing for the central claim, yet no ablation table or numbers are supplied that report standalone TDA performance, standalone ViT performance, and fused performance on the same train/validation/test splits of BRISC2025.
  2. [Evaluation / Results] Evaluation / Results section: the reported metrics (99.10% accuracy, 99.98% AUC) are presented without any description of dataset splits, cross-validation folds, random seeds, or statistical tests; this absence prevents verification that the outperformance over ResNet50, ResNet101, EfficientNetB2 and standalone ViT is reproducible or statistically meaningful.
  3. [Methods] Methods: the fusion step is described only at a high level ('these two feature spaces are then fused'); no equations, architecture diagram, or hyperparameter values are given for the fusion layer, so it is impossible to assess whether the reported gains arise from genuine topological complementarity or from increased model capacity.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Introduction / Dataset] The BRISC2025 dataset is referenced without citation, size breakdown per class, or public availability statement.
  2. [Results] No error bars, standard deviations across runs, or confusion matrices are included to contextualize the near-perfect AUC.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments highlighting the need for stronger empirical support and methodological details. We agree that the current manuscript lacks explicit ablations, split descriptions, and fusion specifications, which are necessary to substantiate the complementarity claim. We will revise the manuscript to address all points raised.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the statement that fusion 'significantly improves performance compared to using either approach alone' and that topological features supply 'valuable complementary information' is load-bearing for the central claim, yet no ablation table or numbers are supplied that report standalone TDA performance, standalone ViT performance, and fused performance on the same train/validation/test splits of BRISC2025.

    Authors: We agree that the central claim requires direct supporting evidence via controlled ablations. In the revised version we will add an ablation table reporting accuracy, precision, recall, F1, and AUC for standalone TDA, standalone ViT, and the fused model on identical train/validation/test splits of BRISC2025, allowing readers to quantify the incremental benefit of the fusion. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Evaluation / Results] Evaluation / Results section: the reported metrics (99.10% accuracy, 99.98% AUC) are presented without any description of dataset splits, cross-validation folds, random seeds, or statistical tests; this absence prevents verification that the outperformance over ResNet50, ResNet101, EfficientNetB2 and standalone ViT is reproducible or statistically meaningful.

    Authors: We will expand the Evaluation section to specify the train/validation/test split ratios, the number of cross-validation folds, the random seeds used for reproducibility, and the statistical tests (e.g., paired t-tests with p-values) applied to compare the fused model against the listed baselines. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [Methods] Methods: the fusion step is described only at a high level ('these two feature spaces are then fused'); no equations, architecture diagram, or hyperparameter values are given for the fusion layer, so it is impossible to assess whether the reported gains arise from genuine topological complementarity or from increased model capacity.

    Authors: We will augment the Methods section with (i) explicit equations describing the fusion operation (e.g., feature concatenation followed by a linear projection), (ii) an architecture diagram illustrating the TDA and ViT branches and the fusion layer, and (iii) all relevant hyperparameters including fusion-layer dimensions, learning rate, and optimizer settings. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in derivation chain; empirical evaluation is self-contained.

full rationale

The paper presents a standard empirical ML fusion architecture (TDA descriptors concatenated with ViT features) and reports test-set metrics on BRISC2025. No mathematical derivation, equation, or 'prediction' is shown that reduces by construction to fitted inputs or self-citations. Claims of complementarity rest on experimental comparison rather than any self-definitional or load-bearing reduction. This is the normal case for an applied CV paper and receives the default non-circularity finding.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the empirical assumption that TDA and ViT features are complementary; no free parameters are explicitly named because the abstract omits training details, but standard deep-learning hyperparameters (learning rate, fusion weights, etc.) are implicitly fitted. No new entities are postulated. Axioms are the usual i.i.d. sampling and that the chosen TDA descriptors are well-defined on MRI pixel data.

free parameters (1)
  • fusion hyperparameters
    Weights or concatenation parameters that combine TDA and ViT feature vectors are chosen during training on BRISC2025.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption TDA descriptors capture geometric structure that is independent of the semantic features learned by ViT
    Invoked when the abstract asserts that fusion 'significantly improves performance compared to using either approach alone'.
  • domain assumption BRISC2025 images are representative of clinical MRI distributions
    Required for the reported accuracy to generalize beyond the dataset.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5823 in / 1613 out tokens · 27188 ms · 2026-06-28T18:40:22.649035+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

45 extracted references · 11 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Medical Image Analysis42, 60–88 (2017)

    Litjens, G.,et al.: A survey on deep learning in medical image analysis. Medical Image Analysis42, 60–88 (2017)

    2017

  2. [2]

    In: CVPR (2016)

    He, K., Zhang, X., Ren, S., Sun, J.: Deep residual learning for image recognition. In: CVPR (2016)

    2016

  3. [3]

    In: ICML (2019)

    Tan, M., Le, Q.: Efficientnet: Rethinking model scaling for convolutional neural networks. In: ICML (2019)

    2019

  4. [4]

    In: International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR) (2021)

    Dosovitskiy, A., Beyer, L.,et al.: An image is worth 16x16 words: Transform- ers for image recognition at scale. In: International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR) (2021)

    2021

  5. [5]

    Plos one19(7), 0298102 (2024)

    Hong, S., Wu, J., Zhu, L., Chen, W.: Brain tumor classification in vit-b/16 based on relative position encoding and residual mlp. Plos one19(7), 0298102 (2024)

    2024

  6. [6]

    Scientific reports14(1), 22797 (2024)

    Ahmed, M.M., Hossain, M.M., Islam, M.R., Ali, M.S., Nafi, A.A.N., Ahmed, M.F., 17 Ahmed, K.M., Miah, M.S., Rahman, M.M., Niu, M.,et al.: Brain tumor detection and classification in mri using hybrid vit and gru model with explainable ai in southern bangladesh. Scientific reports14(1), 22797 (2024)

    2024

  7. [7]

    Expert Systems with Applications, 130509 (2025)

    Kumar, A., et al.: A comprehensive review of transformer models in brain tumor analysis. Expert Systems with Applications, 130509 (2025)

    2025

  8. [8]

    Journal of Imaging Informatics in Medicine 38(6), 3928–3971 (2025)

    Aburass, S., Dorgham, O., Al Shaqsi, J., Abu Rumman, M., Al-Kadi, O.: Vision transformers in medical imaging: a comprehensive review of advancements and applications across multiple diseases. Journal of Imaging Informatics in Medicine 38(6), 3928–3971 (2025)

    2025

  9. [9]

    Brain131(3), 681–689 (2008)

    Kl¨ oppel, S.,et al.: Automatic classification of mr scans in alzheimer’s disease. Brain131(3), 681–689 (2008)

    2008

  10. [10]

    Ebrahimi-Ghahnavieh, M.A.,et al.: Convolutional neural networks for medi- cal image analysis: Full training or fine tuning? IEEE Access9, 102399–102415 (2021)

    2021

  11. [11]

    Pattern Recognition Letters (2021)

    Wang, S., et al.: Dense convolutional neural networks for brain mri classification. Pattern Recognition Letters (2021)

    2021

  12. [12]

    Biomedical Signal Processing and Control (2024)

    Fathi, M., et al.: Deep ensemble learning for medical image classification. Biomedical Signal Processing and Control (2024)

    2024

  13. [13]

    In: MICCAI (2007)

    Bazin, P.-L., Pham, D.L.: Topology-preserving tissue classification of magnetic resonance brain images. In: MICCAI (2007)

    2007

  14. [14]

    IEEE Access (2023)

    Alshamlan, H., et al.: Identifying relevant features in mri using mrmr. IEEE Access (2023)

    2023

  15. [15]

    Expert Systems with Applications (2024)

    Alshamlan, H., et al.: Improving mri classification with feature selection. Expert Systems with Applications (2024)

    2024

  16. [16]

    Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society 46(2), 255–308 (2009)

    Carlsson, G.: Topology and data. Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society 46(2), 255–308 (2009)

    2009

  17. [17]

    Contemporary Mathe- matics453, 257–282 (2008)

    Edelsbrunner, H., Harer, J.: Persistent homologya survey. Contemporary Mathe- matics453, 257–282 (2008)

    2008

  18. [18]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.00918 (2026)

    Ahmed, F.: Four-stage alzheimer’s disease classification from mri using topolog- ical feature extraction, feature selection, and ensemble learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.00918 (2026)

    work page arXiv 2026

  19. [19]

    Journal of Imaging Informatics in Medicine, 1–17 (2025) 18

    Ahmed, F., Bhuiyan, M.A.N., Coskunuzer, B.: Topo-cnn: Retinal image analysis with topological deep learning. Journal of Imaging Informatics in Medicine, 1–17 (2025) 18

    2025

  20. [20]

    In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pp

    Ahmed, F., Nuwagira, B., Torlak, F., Coskunuzer, B.: Topo-CXR: Chest X-ray TB and Pneumonia Screening with Topological Machine Learning. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pp. 2326–2336 (2023)

    2023

  21. [21]

    PhD thesis, The University of Texas at Dallas (2023)

    Ahmed, F.: Topological machine learning in medical image analysis. PhD thesis, The University of Texas at Dallas (2023)

    2023

  22. [22]

    In: Annual Conference on Medical Image Understanding and Analysis, pp

    Ahmed, F., Coskunuzer, B.: Tofi-ml: Retinal image screening with topological machine learning. In: Annual Conference on Medical Image Understanding and Analysis, pp. 281–297 (2023). Springer

    2023

  23. [23]

    Available at SSRN 5882122 (2025)

    Ahmed, F.: 3d-tda: Topological feature extraction from 3d mri for alzheimer’s disease classification. Available at SSRN 5882122 (2025)

    2025

  24. [24]

    In: 2023 IEEE International Conference on Bioinformatics and Biomedicine (BIBM), pp

    Yadav, A., Ahmed, F., Daescu, O., Gedik, R., Coskunuzer, B.: Histopatholog- ical cancer detection with topological signatures. In: 2023 IEEE International Conference on Bioinformatics and Biomedicine (BIBM), pp. 1610–1619 (2023). IEEE

    2023

  25. [25]

    gradient histograms: A comparative study for medical image classification

    Ahmed, F.: Topological signatures vs. gradient histograms: A comparative study for medical image classification. arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.03006 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  26. [26]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.13771 (2026)

    Ahmed, F.: Brain tumor classification from 3d mri using persistent homology and betti features: A topological data analysis approach on brats2020. arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.13771 (2026)

    work page arXiv 2026

  27. [27]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.00956 (2026)

    Ahmed, F.: Hybrid topological and deep feature fusion for accurate mri-based alzheimer’s disease severity classification. arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.00956 (2026)

    work page arXiv 2026

  28. [28]

    In: ICCV (2021)

    Liu, Z.,et al.: Swin transformer: Hierarchical vision transformer. In: ICCV (2021)

    2021

  29. [29]

    Scientific Reports15(1), 38275 (2025)

    Sankari, C., Jamuna, V., Kavitha, A.: Hierarchical multi-scale vision transformer model for accurate detection and classification of brain tumors in mri-based medical imaging. Scientific Reports15(1), 38275 (2025)

    2025

  30. [30]

    In: 2023 45th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine & Biology Society (EMBC), pp

    Dhinagar, N.J., Thomopoulos, S.I., Laltoo, E., Thompson, P.M.: Efficiently train- ing vision transformers on structural mri scans for alzheimers disease detection. In: 2023 45th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine & Biology Society (EMBC), pp. 1–6 (2023). IEEE

    2023

  31. [31]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.16964 (2025)

    Ahmed, F.: Colormap-enhanced vision transformers for mri-based multiclass (4- class) alzheimer’s disease classification. arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.16964 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  32. [32]

    Journal of Imaging Informatics in Medicine, 1–16 (2026) 19

    Ahmed, F.: Hog-cnn: Integrating histogram of oriented gradients with convo- lutional neural networks for retinal image classification. Journal of Imaging Informatics in Medicine, 1–16 (2026) 19

    2026

  33. [33]

    Journal of Imaging Informatics in Medicine, 1–11 (2025)

    Ahmed, F., Uddin, M.J.: Ocuvit: A vision transformer-based approach for auto- mated diabetic retinopathy and amd classification. Journal of Imaging Informatics in Medicine, 1–11 (2025)

    2025

  34. [34]

    arXiv e-prints, 2507 (2025)

    Ahmed, F., Alfrad Nobel Bhuiyan, M.: Robust five-class and binary diabetic retinopathy classification using transfer learning and data augmentation. arXiv e-prints, 2507 (2025)

    2025

  35. [35]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.11181 (2025)

    Ahmed, F.: Histovit: Vision transformer for accurate and scalable histopatholog- ical cancer diagnosis. arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.11181 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  36. [36]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.17121 (2025)

    Ahmed, F.: Addressing high class imbalance in multi-class diabetic retinopa- thy severity grading with augmentation and transfer learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.17121 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  37. [37]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.08234 (2025)

    Ahmed, F.: Repvit-cxr: A channel replication strategy for vision transform- ers in chest x-ray tuberculosis and pneumonia classification. arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.08234 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  38. [38]

    Avail- able at SSRN 5547319 (2025)

    Ahmed, F.: Pseudocolorvit-cxr: Colormap-enhanced vision transformers for tuberculosis and pneumonia detection from grayscale chest x-ray images. Avail- able at SSRN 5547319 (2025)

    2025

  39. [39]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.18553 (2025)

    Rawat, R., Ahmed, F.: Efficient breast and ovarian cancer classification via vit-based preprocessing and transfer learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.18553 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  40. [40]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.06535 (2025)

    Ahmed, F.: Transfer learning with efficientnet for accurate leukemia cell classifi- cation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.06535 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  41. [41]

    https://www.kaggle.com/datasets/briscdataset/ brisc2025

    Fateh, A., Rezvani, Y., et al.: BRISC2025: Brain Tumor MRI Dataset for Seg- mentation and Classification. https://www.kaggle.com/datasets/briscdataset/ brisc2025

  42. [42]

    IEEE Access (2022)

    Goutam, B., Hashmi, M.F., Geem, Z.W., Bokde, N.D.: A comprehensive review of deep learning strategies in retinal disease diagnosis using fundus images. IEEE Access (2022)

    2022

  43. [43]

    Scientific Data (2026)

    Fateh, A., Rezvani, Y., Moayedi, S., Rezvani, S., Fateh, F., Fateh, M., Abol- ghasemi, V.: Brisc: Annotated dataset for brain tumor segmentation and classification. Scientific Data (2026)

    2026

  44. [44]

    Multimedia Tools and Applications85(5), 491 (2026)

    Indian, A., Meena, G., Sharma, D.: An improved cnn model for characterizing brain tumors using deep learning. Multimedia Tools and Applications85(5), 491 (2026)

    2026

  45. [45]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.21234 (2026) 21

    Ahmed, F.: Enhancing brain tumor classification using vision transformers 20 with colormap-based feature representation on brisc2025 dataset. arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.21234 (2026) 21

    work page arXiv 2026