Medical Manifestation-Aware De-Identification

Guangtao Zhai; Shuo Wang; Yuan Tian

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 78 references

Medical Manifestation-Aware De-Identification

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Synthetic patient faces could let doctors share images without leaking identity or losing disease clues.

desk verdict First public synthetic medical face dataset with a reversible DeID method that survives an external clinical trial; the privacy guarantee is weaker than the abstract claims. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.10804 v1 pith:Z5T5AE24 submitted 2024-12-14 cs.CV cs.AI

Yuan Tian , Shuo Wang , Guangtao Zhai This is my paper · ORCID

classification cs.CVcs.AI

keywords facede-identificationmedicalmanifestationpreservationsyntheticpatientfacesdiffusionmodelsreversibleimageprivacyeyediseasedataset

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 argues that face de-identification for medical images fails because existing methods erase the disease signs doctors need, and because no large patient-face dataset exists for learning those signs. It answers both problems at once: it releases MeMa, a 42,307-image synthetic dataset re-generated from real patient photos and annotated by clinicians, and it proposes MedSem-DeID, a reversible de-identification pipeline that injects a medical-semantics prior learned from MeMa into the encryption process. The reported outcome is that de-identified faces keep their diagnostic value (86.70% disease classification, 0.6775 segmentation Dice, physician agreement kappa above 0.81) while identity matching falls to 1.76% in a simulated authentication system. If correct, this would make privacy-protected sharing of patient face imagery practical for medical AI.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is MedSem-DeID, a pipeline whose image-encoder feature map is channel-concatenated with a medical feature map extracted by the frozen early blocks of a diffusion model trained on MeMa, then encrypted by password-conditioned Transformer blocks (ID-Encryptor) and decrypted by matching Transformer blocks (ID-Decryptor). The medical prior enters twice: as a feature-level injection and as a loss term Lmed that forces the encrypted image to match the original's medical semantics. A second diffusion model fine-tuned with LoRA on real patient data, sampled with IP-Adapter injections from public faces and real-guided age/gender/disease distributions, produces MeMa itself.

What would settle it

Run a re-identification study using newer photographs of the 12,467 original patients against all 42,307 published MeMa images, or apply a stronger face-recognition model than the three used; if any real patient can be reliably re-identified from a published MeMa image, the central privacy claim fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that medical manifestations are learnable, preservable, and separable from identity: a diffusion model fine-tuned on real patient photos and re-sampled with public-face attribute injection yields a large synthetic patient cohort whose disease signs physicians rate as plausible, and a de-identification network guided by a frozen medical-semantics encoder can hide identity while keeping those exact signs. The paper further claims that this dataset-plus-prior recipe outperforms all previous de-identification methods on both medical utility and privacy metrics, including on a real-world cohort of 129 patients from a different hospital.

Load-bearing premise

The claim that MeMa never leaks real patients' identities rests entirely on three face-recognition models failing to match the generated images back to the original photos.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Disease classification on de-identified faces reaches 86.70% accuracy, more than ten points above the best prior method.
Tumor segmentation on de-identified images reaches a Dice score of 0.6775, beating both hand-crafted medical priors and generic utility-preserving methods.
Real physicians agree with original diagnoses at kappa above 0.81, even for disease types not seen during training.
De-identified faces match the real patient's ID photo only 1.76% of the time in a simulated identity-authentication system.
The method is reversible: with the correct password the original image is recovered with 89.34% disease-classification accuracy and 27.02 dB PSNR.

Reading between the lines

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

If the privacy claim survives a stronger re-identification attack, the MeMa recipe could be ported to other sensitive image domains, such as dermatology or psychiatry, without new patient photography.
The 1.27% residual identity-match rate is the natural stress point: a re-identification study using newer photographs of the same 12,467 patients would reveal whether those matches are true look-alikes or memorized identities that the three matchers happened to miss.
Because MedSem-DeID is reversible by design, its practical privacy depends on password custody: anyone holding the password can reconstruct the original image, so the method fits controlled clinical workflows where traceability is legally required rather than public release of encrypted images.
The medical-semantics encoder trained on MeMa could transfer to other ocular-image tasks, such as lesion synthesis or disease-progression simulation, since it already encodes localized diagnostic cues as dense features.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Colleague,

The thing to know about this paper is that it gives the field something it didn't have: a public synthetic patient-face dataset with physician-validated disease labels and lesion masks, plus a reversible de-identification method that demonstrably keeps diagnostic signs. The strongest evidence is the external clinical trial: 129 real patients from a different hospital, three physicians, kappa above 0.81 for five disease categories including two not in training. That is a real-world transfer result and it should be taken seriously.

The novelty is real. MeMa is the first medical-scene face DeID dataset of this scale (42,307 images, seven eye diseases plus normal). The annotation effort — physicians labeling disease types and segmenting tumors — is exactly what the community lacks. MedSem-DeID is not a new architecture; it is LoRA-fine-tuned Stable Diffusion plus IP-Adapter and a medical encoder, but the application is new and the ablations show each piece contributes. They also retrain two baselines on MeMa and still lag, which is fair.

The soft spots are mostly around evidence for the headline privacy claim. The abstract says MeMa 'avoids breaching real patient privacy,' but the support is a match-rate reduction to 1.27% under three face-recognition models, and no post-filter match rate is reported after the Step-3 identity-distance filtering. That is a gap. A generated image set could pass those matchers and still contain identity information recoverable by other means, and the generative model itself could encode patient identity even if no output matches. A membership-inference analysis or at least a report of how many images were filtered would make the claim credible. This is the load-bearing weakness in the paper's ethical framing.

The other soft spot is that the main MeMa benchmark is a closed loop: the DiNov2 classifier and the medical encoder are trained on MeMa's training split and evaluated on MeMa's validation split from the same generator. That likely inflates the classification numbers. The external clinical trial partially rescues the generalization claim, but it only measures diagnostic consistency, not classification accuracy on real images.

The uneven baseline comparison bothers me less — they retrain baselines on MeMa in a separate experiment and still come out ahead.

In short: the dataset and benchmark are a genuine resource, the method is a solid baseline, and the external validation is the best part. The privacy claim needs harder evidence before I'd trust the release. Worth a serious referee; I'd send it out with a request for privacy analysis and a less circular benchmark.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper addresses face de-identification in medical scenes. The authors construct MeMa, a dataset of 42,307 synthetic patient-face images generated from 39,323 real patient photos via a fine-tuned Stable Diffusion model with IP-Adapter injection of public face attributes, followed by identity-distance filtering and physician quality filtering and annotation. They propose MedSem-DeID, a reversible DeID method that injects a medical semantics encoder (trained on MeMa) into a GAN-based encryption/decryption pipeline and regularizes the de-identified image to preserve medical features. Experiments on MeMa show state-of-the-art disease classification (86.70% Top-1) and segmentation Dice (0.6775), and a real-world clinical trial on 129 patients reports physician diagnostic consistency kappa > 0.81.

Significance. If the results hold, the paper makes a valuable contribution by introducing the first large-scale synthetic patient-face dataset (MeMa) with expert annotations and a reversible DeID method that explicitly preserves medical manifestation semantics. The inclusion of a real-world clinical trial on an external cohort (ECXHCSU) is a notable strength, as is the planned release of dataset and code, which will facilitate reproducibility. However, the main benchmark evaluation is subject to a closed-loop between the medical-utility classifier and the proposed method's medical prior, and the privacy guarantee for MeMa is supported only by empirical matching rates without formal analysis. These issues need to be resolved before the quantitative claims can be fully accepted.

major comments (3)

[Experiments / Evaluation Protocol and Metrics] The main medical-utility evaluation is circular. The DiNov2 classifier is fine-tuned on the MeMa training set (Section 'Evaluation Protocol and Metrics'), and the proposed MedSem-DeID method obtains its medical prior from the MeMa-trained medical encoder (Section 'Medical Semantics Encoding'). Both the classifier and the encoder are therefore adapted to the same synthetic image distribution, so the 86.70% Top-1 accuracy on the MeMa validation set may reflect distribution alignment rather than preservation of clinically meaningful manifestations. To support the claim that MedSem-DeID preserves medical utility, the paper should evaluate on an independent real-image benchmark, for instance a classifier trained on real patient photographs, or report the real-world physician diagnosis as the primary utility metric rather than only as a secondary outcome.
[Approach / MeMa Dataset (Steps 2-3, Table 1)] The privacy claim that 'MeMa avoids breaching real patient privacy' (Abstract) is not established by the presented evidence. The reduction in identity-leakage percentage from 71.8% to 1.27% is measured with three face-recognition models (Table 1), but no formal privacy analysis (e.g., differential privacy, membership inference) is provided. More importantly, the residual 1.27% is not analyzed: the paper does not report how many images were removed by the Step-3 identity-distance filter, whether any residual matching images remain in the released 42,307-image set, or what re-identification risk those residual images pose. Additionally, the face-recognition models used are trained on ordinary face photographs and may not detect memorization of medical-specific image cues. The authors should either provide a rigorous privacy evaluation or substantially temper the strong privacy guarantee in the abstract and dataset description.
[MeMa Dataset (Step 3) vs. Experiments (Datasets)] There is a factual inconsistency in the description of the MeMa-Seg subset. Step 3 of the dataset construction says the physicians segment the tumor mask on the subset of 'SCC images', while the Experiments section defines MeMa-Seg as 'for the BCC (basal cell carcinoma) disease type' (and the table captions refer to MeMa-Seg without specifying the disease). This discrepancy must be corrected, as it is essential for reproducibility and for interpreting the segmentation results (Table 3, Dice 0.6775).

minor comments (5)

[Table 8 caption] The table header reads 'MaMa validation set'; this should be 'MeMa validation set'.
[Figure 8] The axis labels in Figure 8 appear garbled in the supplied version; please ensure the figure is rendered correctly in the final version.
[References] The citation to the MSD manual is incomplete; a full bibliographic entry should be provided.
[Table 5] The model names 'FaceNet VGGFace2' and 'FaceNetCASIA' should have consistent formatting (e.g., spaces or underscores) for readability.
[Conclusion and Limitation] The limitation section only mentions the narrow scope of disease types; it should also acknowledge the limitations of the privacy analysis and the potential for distribution shift between synthetic and real patient data.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Partial circularity in the MeMa medical-utility benchmark; independent real-world trial prevents full reduction.

fitted input called prediction [Approach: Medical Semantics Encoding; Learning Objectives; Experiments: Evaluation Protocol and Metrics]
"we train another diffusion model on the proposed MeMa dataset to learn the medical semantics. ... Lmed = ℓ2(fmed, Encmed(Xenc)) facilitate the encrypted image is similar to the original image in terms of medical semantics. ... for the disease classification task, we fine-tune the DiNov2 model on the MeMa training set. We evaluate its Top1 accuracy on the MeMa validation set processed by various DeID approaches."

Both the medical prior Encmed and the medical-utility probe DiNov2 are fitted to the same MeMa training distribution, and the MedSem-DeID objective explicitly trains Encmed(Xenc) to match fmed(X). The headline Med-Class numbers in Table 3 therefore measure how well de-identified images stay inside the MeMa-learned semantic space shared by the encoder and the classifier, rather than providing an independent check that diagnosis-relevant signs survive. This is a closed evaluation loop: the method is optimized to preserve the features of a MeMa-trained encoder, and utility is then scored by a MeMa-trained classifier.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation is a dataset-construction and benchmark pipeline, not a formal first-principles prediction. The main circularity concern is that the medical utility evaluation is partly self-referential: the medical semantics encoder and the DiNov2 classifier are both trained on MeMa, and the method is trained with Lmed to match the encoder's features, so high Med-Class accuracy on the MeMa validation set partly reflects alignment of training distributions rather than independently verified medical preservation. This loop is materially mitigated by the real-world clinical trial on Real-ECXHCSU with physician Cohen's kappa >0.81, which is outside the MeMa training distribution and still shows strong performance. The self-citations in the paper are background motivation (e.g., diffusion semantics references) and are not load-bearing; no uniqueness theorem or ansatz is imported from the authors' prior work, and no result is renamed as a new discovery. The identity-privacy claim rests on an empirical face-matching metric and filtering procedure, which is a definitional safeguard rather than a circular derivation, though the 1.27% residual and lack of formal privacy bounds remain a correctness risk rather than a circularity risk. Overall, the benchmark loop is a real but partial circularity, and the independent external trial keeps the central claim from collapsing into it.

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

The central claims rest on two domain assumptions: synthetic faces can stand in for real patients, and face-recognition match rate is an adequate privacy proxy. The method also has two hand-tuned loss weights selected on a validation split. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)

lambda_med = 5
Chosen on the 3,729-image hyper-parameter selection set to trade off medical classification accuracy and ID-Dis (Figure 8, left). The central claim of medical utility preservation depends on this balance.
lambda_rev = 0.1
Chosen on the hyper-parameter selection set to balance reversible reconstruction quality and DeID performance (Figure 8, right). The reversibility claim depends on this weight.
IP-Adapter injection weight range = [0.2, 0.4] random
Hand-set range to improve diversity and reduce identity leakage; not fitted to data but a design choice affecting the privacy and diversity trade-off.

assumptions (3)

domain assumption Synthetic faces generated by a LoRA-fine-tuned Stable Diffusion with IP-Adapter injection are sufficiently representative of real patient faces to train and evaluate medical DeID systems.
The entire MeMa dataset and all models trained on it rely on this transfer; the paper provides indirect evidence via physician filtering and the Real-ECXHCSU trial, but it is not proven.
domain assumption Identity leakage can be measured by the match rate against SphereFace, ArcFace, and CosFace; no formal privacy guarantee is provided.
The claim that MeMa avoids breaching patient privacy rests on this empirical proxy (Table 1), not on a formal re-identification risk analysis.
domain assumption The DiNov2 classifier fine-tuned on MeMa is a valid proxy for medical utility in the benchmark.
Med-Class accuracy on MeMa validation is used as the primary medical utility metric; its validity depends on the synthetic training distribution matching real clinical relevance.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Medical Manifestation-Aware De-Identification." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/Z5T5AE24

@misc{pith2026241210804,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Medical Manifestation-Aware De-Identification},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/Z5T5AE24}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.10804}
}

read the original abstract

Face de-identification (DeID) has been widely studied for common scenes, but remains under-researched for medical scenes, mostly due to the lack of large-scale patient face datasets. In this paper, we release MeMa, consisting of over 40,000 photo-realistic patient faces. MeMa is re-generated from massive real patient photos. By carefully modulating the generation and data-filtering procedures, MeMa avoids breaching real patient privacy, while ensuring rich and plausible medical manifestations. We recruit expert clinicians to annotate MeMa with both coarse- and fine-grained labels, building the first medical-scene DeID benchmark. Additionally, we propose a baseline approach for this new medical-aware DeID task, by integrating data-driven medical semantic priors into the DeID procedure. Despite its conciseness and simplicity, our approach substantially outperforms previous ones. Dataset is available at https://github.com/tianyuan168326/MeMa-Pytorch.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.10804 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** Examples and the distribution characteristics of the proposed MeMa dataset. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** MeMa building pipeline. (a) Training patient face [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (5 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Comparison of different image generation strate [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Overview of the proposed baseline model MedSem-DeID. The snow icon indicates the Encmed is frozen during training DeID networks. The image decoder after the ID-decryptor is omitted for briefness. ⊕ denotes the channel-wise concatenation operation. Given the original im…

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Qualitative results of different methods on the MeMA validation set. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_6.png]

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: Qualitative results of the recovered image of dif [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_7.png]

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: Impact of the loss weights for the medical ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

78 extracted references · 48 canonical work pages

[1]

A.; Hempel, T.; Khalifa, A.; Al-Hamadi, A.; and Dinges, L

Abdelrahman, A. A.; Hempel, T.; Khalifa, A.; Al-Hamadi, A.; and Dinges, L. 2023. L2cs-net: Fine-grained gaze estimation in unconstrained environments. In 2023 8th International Conference on Frontiers of Signal Processing (ICFSP), 98--102. IEEE

work page 2023
[2]

Banerjee, M.; Capozzoli, M.; McSweeney, L.; and Sinha, D. 1999. Beyond kappa: A review of interrater agreement measures. Canadian journal of statistics, 27(1): 3--23

work page 1999
[3]

S.; and Wu, Z

Cai, Z.; Gao, Z.; Planche, B.; Zheng, M.; Chen, T.; Asif, M. S.; and Wu, Z. 2024. Disguise without disruption: Utility-preserving face de-identification. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, volume 38, 918--926

work page 2024
[4]

Cao, J.; Liu, B.; Wen, Y.; Xie, R.; and Song, L. 2021. Personalized and invertible face de-identification by disentangled identity information manipulation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, 3334--3342

work page 2021
[5]

M.; and Zisserman, A

Cao, Q.; Shen, L.; Xie, W.; Parkhi, O. M.; and Zisserman, A. 2018. Vggface2: A dataset for recognising faces across pose and age. In 2018 13th IEEE international conference on automatic face & gesture recognition (FG 2018), 67--74. IEEE

2018
[6]

Chen, H.; Qu, Z.; Tian, Y.; Jiang, N.; Qin, Y.; Gao, J.; Zhang, R.; Ma, Y.; Jin, Z.; and Zhai, G. 2024 a . A cross-temporal multimodal fusion system based on deep learning for orthodontic monitoring. Computers in Biology and Medicine, 180: 109025

work page 2024
[7]

Chen, Z.; Sun, W.; Tian, Y.; Jia, J.; Zhang, Z.; Wang, J.; Huang, R.; Min, X.; Zhai, G.; and Zhang, W. 2024 b . GAIA: Rethinking Action Quality Assessment for AI-Generated Videos. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.06087

arXiv 2024
[8]

Deng, J.; Guo, J.; Xue, N.; and Zafeiriou, S. 2019. Arcface: Additive angular margin loss for deep face recognition. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 4690--4699

2019

Show all 78 references

[9]

Duan, H.; Shen, W.; Min, X.; Tian, Y.; Jung, J.-H.; Yang, X.; and Zhai, G. 2022. Develop then rival: A human vision-inspired framework for superimposed image decomposition. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 25: 4267--4281

2022
[10]

Z.; et al

Fletcher, S.; Islam, M. Z.; et al. 2018. Comparing sets of patterns with the Jaccard index. Australasian Journal of Information Systems, 22

2018
[11]

Gao, C.; Jiang, Y.; Wu, S.; Ma, Y.; Li, L.; and Liu, D. 2024. IMOFC: Identity-Level Metric Optimized Feature Compression for Identification Tasks. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology

2024
[12]

Gao, C.; Li, L.; Liu, D.; Chen, Z.; Li, W.; and Wu, F. 2022. Two-step fast mode decision for intra coding of screen content. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, 32(8): 5608--5622

2022
[13]

Gao, C.; Liu, D.; Li, L.; and Wu, F. 2021. Towards task-generic image compression: A study of semantics-oriented metrics. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 25: 721--735

2021
[14]

Gross, R.; Sweeney, L.; De la Torre, F.; and Baker, S. 2006. Model-based face de-identification. In 2006 Conference on computer vision and pattern recognition workshop (CVPRW'06), 161--161. IEEE

2006
[15]

S.; and Lee, Y

Gu, X.; Luo, W.; Ryoo, M. S.; and Lee, Y. J. 2020. Password-conditioned anonymization and deanonymization with face identity transformers. In European conference on computer vision, 727--743. Springer

2020
[16]

Guideline, I. H. T. 2001. Guideline for good clinical practice. J Postgrad Med, 47(3): 199--203

2001
[17]

He, K.; Chen, X.; Xie, S.; Li, Y.; Doll \'a r, P.; and Girshick, R. 2022. Masked autoencoders are scalable vision learners. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 16000--16009

2022
[18]

He, K.; Fan, H.; Wu, Y.; Xie, S.; and Girshick, R. 2020. Momentum contrast for unsupervised visual representation learning. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 9729--9738

2020
[19]

He, K.; Zhang, X.; Ren, S.; and Sun, J. 2016. Deep residual learning for image recognition. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 770--778

2016
[20]

Hedlin, E.; Sharma, G.; Mahajan, S.; Isack, H.; Kar, A.; Tagliasacchi, A.; and Yi, K. M. 2024. Unsupervised semantic correspondence using stable diffusion. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36

2024
[21]

J.; Shen, Y.; Wallis, P.; Allen-Zhu, Z.; Li, Y.; Wang, S.; Wang, L.; and Chen, W

Hu, E. J.; Shen, Y.; Wallis, P.; Allen-Zhu, Z.; Li, Y.; Wang, S.; Wang, L.; and Chen, W. 2021. Lora: Low-rank adaptation of large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2106.09685

2021 arXiv
[22]

Hu, Z.; Li, S.; Zhang, C.; Yi, K.; Wang, G.; and Manocha, D. 2020. Dgaze: Cnn-based gaze prediction in dynamic scenes. IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics, 26(5): 1902--1911

2020
[23]

B.; Mattar, M.; Berg, T.; and Learned-Miller, E

Huang, G. B.; Mattar, M.; Berg, T.; and Learned-Miller, E. 2008 a . Labeled faces in the wild: A database forstudying face recognition in unconstrained environments. In Workshop on faces in'Real-Life'Images: detection, alignment, and recognition

2008
[24]

B.; Mattar, M.; Berg, T.; and Learned-Miller, E

Huang, G. B.; Mattar, M.; Berg, T.; and Learned-Miller, E. 2008 b . Labeled Faces in the Wild: A Database forStudying Face Recognition in Unconstrained Environments. Month

2008
[25]

Hukkel s, H.; Mester, R.; and Lindseth, F. 2019. Deepprivacy: A generative adversarial network for face anonymization. In International symposium on visual computing, 565--578. Springer

2019
[26]

F.; Kohl, S

Isensee, F.; Jaeger, P. F.; Kohl, S. A.; Petersen, J.; and Maier-Hein, K. H. 2021. nnU-Net: a self-configuring method for deep learning-based biomedical image segmentation. Nature methods, 18(2): 203--211

2021
[27]

Jourabloo, A.; Yin, X.; and Liu, X. 2015. Attribute preserved face de-identification. In 2015 International conference on biometrics (ICB), 278--285. IEEE

2015
[28]

F.; Simpson, J

Kamnitsas, K.; Ledig, C.; Newcombe, V. F.; Simpson, J. P.; Kane, A. D.; Menon, D. K.; Rueckert, D.; and Glocker, B. 2017. Efficient multi-scale 3D CNN with fully connected CRF for accurate brain lesion segmentation. Medical image analysis, 36: 61--78

2017
[29]

Karkkainen, K.; and Joo, J. 2021. Fairface: Face attribute dataset for balanced race, gender, and age for bias measurement and mitigation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF winter conference on applications of computer vision, 1548--1558

2021
[30]

Karras, T.; Aila, T.; Laine, S.; and Lehtinen, J. 2017. Progressive growing of gans for improved quality, stability, and variation. arXiv preprint arXiv:1710.10196

2017 arXiv
[31]

Karras, T.; Laine, S.; and Aila, T. 2019. A style-based generator architecture for generative adversarial networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 4401--4410

2019
[32]

King, D. E. 2009. Dlib-ml: A machine learning toolkit. The Journal of Machine Learning Research, 10: 1755--1758

2009
[33]

Kingma, D. 2014. Adam: a method for stochastic optimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6980

2014 arXiv
[34]

C.; Lo, W.-Y.; et al

Kirillov, A.; Mintun, E.; Ravi, N.; Mao, H.; Rolland, C.; Gustafson, L.; Xiao, T.; Whitehead, S.; Berg, A. C.; Lo, W.-Y.; et al. 2023. Segment anything. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, 4015--4026

2023
[35]

Kong, Y.; and Fu, Y. 2022. Human action recognition and prediction: A survey. International Journal of Computer Vision, 130(5): 1366--1401

2022
[36]

Li, C.; Zhang, J.; Zhang, Z.; Wu, H.; Tian, Y.; Sun, W.; Lu, G.; Liu, X.; Min, X.; Lin, W.; et al. 2024 a . R-Bench: Are your Large Multimodal Model Robust to Real-world Corruptions? arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.05474

2024 arXiv
[37]

Li, D.; Wang, W.; Zhao, K.; Dong, J.; and Tan, T. 2023. RiDDLE: Reversible and Diversified De-Identification With Latent Encryptor. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 8093--8102

2023
[38]

Li, X.; Lu, J.; Han, K.; and Prisacariu, V. A. 2024 b . Sd4match: Learning to prompt stable diffusion model for semantic matching. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 27558--27568

2024
[39]

Liu, W.; Wen, Y.; Yu, Z.; Li, M.; Raj, B.; and Song, L. 2017. Sphereface: Deep hypersphere embedding for face recognition. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 212--220

2017
[40]

Maximov, M.; Elezi, I.; and Leal-Taix \'e , L. 2020. Ciagan: Conditional identity anonymization generative adversarial networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 5447--5456

2020
[41]

Merck & Co., R. N. U., Inc. 2024. MSD MANUALS: The Trusted Provider of Medical Information since 1899. https://www.msdmanuals.com/

2024
[42]

Min, X.; Duan, H.; Sun, W.; Zhu, Y.; and Zhai, G. 2024. Perceptual video quality assessment: A survey. Science China Information Sciences, 67(11): 211301

2024
[43]

Mohsenin, A.; and Huang, J. J. 2012. Ocular manifestations of systemic inflammatory diseases. Connecticut medicine, 76(9)

2012
[44]

Oquab, M.; Darcet, T.; Moutakanni, T.; Vo, H.; Szafraniec, M.; Khalidov, V.; Fernandez, P.; Haziza, D.; Massa, F.; El-Nouby, A.; et al. 2023. Dinov2: Learning robust visual features without supervision. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.07193

2023 arXiv
[45]

N.; and Cohen, I

Price, W. N.; and Cohen, I. G. 2019. Privacy in the age of medical big data. Nature medicine, 25(1): 37--43

2019
[46]

J.; and Ryoo, M

Ren, Z.; Lee, Y. J.; and Ryoo, M. S. 2018. Learning to anonymize faces for privacy preserving action detection. In Proceedings of the european conference on computer vision (ECCV), 620--636

2018
[47]

Rombach, R.; Blattmann, A.; Lorenz, D.; Esser, P.; and Ommer, B. 2022. High-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 10684--10695

2022
[48]

R \"u schendorf, L. 1985. The Wasserstein distance and approximation theorems. Probability Theory and Related Fields, 70(1): 117--129

1985
[49]

Schroff, F.; Kalenichenko, D.; and Philbin, J. 2015. Facenet: A unified embedding for face recognition and clustering. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 815--823

2015
[50]

Schuhmann, C.; Beaumont, R.; Vencu, R.; Gordon, C.; Wightman, R.; Cherti, M.; Coombes, T.; Katta, A.; Mullis, C.; Wortsman, M.; et al. 2022. Laion-5b: An open large-scale dataset for training next generation image-text models. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems,...

2022
[51]

Serengil, S. 2020. DeepFace: Face Recognition with Deep Neural Networks. https://github.com/serengil/deepface

2020
[52]

I.; and Ozpinar, A

Serengil, S. I.; and Ozpinar, A. 2021. HyperExtended LightFace: A Facial Attribute Analysis Framework. In 2021 International Conference on Engineering and Emerging Technologies (ICEET), 1--4. IEEE

2021
[53]

Sharir, G.; Noy, A.; and Zelnik-Manor, L. 2021. An image is worth 16x16 words, what is a video worth? arXiv preprint arXiv:2103.13915

2021 arXiv
[54]

Tan, X.; Zhu, Y.; Cheng, Z.; Hu, M.; Zhang, X.; Pei, G.; Yu, C.; Li, Q.; Li, W.; and Wang, J. 2024. Low-cost and portable physiological signal monitor using PhysRate model. Displays, 81: 102605

2024
[55]

P.; and Hariharan, B

Tang, L.; Jia, M.; Wang, Q.; Phoo, C. P.; and Hariharan, B. 2023. Emergent correspondence from image diffusion. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36: 1363--1389

2023
[56]

Tian, J.; Aggarwal, L.; Colaco, A.; Kira, Z.; and Gonzalez-Franco, M. 2024 a . Diffuse Attend and Segment: Unsupervised Zero-Shot Segmentation using Stable Diffusion. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 3554--3563

2024
[57]

Tian, Y.; Che, Z.; Bao, W.; Zhai, G.; and Gao, Z. 2020. Self-supervised motion representation via scattering local motion cues. In Computer Vision--ECCV 2020: 16th European Conference, Glasgow, UK, August 23--28, 2020, Proceedings, Part XIV 16, 71--89. Springer

2020
[58]

Tian, Y.; Lu, G.; Min, X.; Che, Z.; Zhai, G.; Guo, G.; and Gao, Z. 2021. Self-conditioned probabilistic learning of video rescaling. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, 4490--4499

2021
[59]

Tian, Y.; Lu, G.; Yan, Y.; Zhai, G.; Chen, L.; and Gao, Z. 2024 b . A coding framework and benchmark towards low-bitrate video understanding. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence

2024
[60]

Tian, Y.; Lu, G.; and Zhai, G. 2024. SMC++: Masked Learning of Unsupervised Video Semantic Compression. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.04765

2024
[61]

Tian, Y.; Lu, G.; and Zhai, G. 2025. Free-VSC: Free Semantics from Visual Foundation Models for Unsupervised Video Semantic Compression. In European Conference on Computer Vision, 163--183. Springer

2025
[62]

Tian, Y.; Lu, G.; Zhai, G.; and Gao, Z. 2023 a . Non-semantics suppressed mask learning for unsupervised video semantic compression. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, 13610--13622

2023
[63]

Tian, Y.; Min, X.; Zhai, G.; and Gao, Z. 2019. Video-based early asd detection via temporal pyramid networks. In 2019 IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo (ICME), 272--277. IEEE

2019
[64]

Tian, Y.; Yan, Y.; Zhai, G.; Chen, L.; and Gao, Z. 2023 b . Clsa: a contrastive learning framework with selective aggregation for video rescaling. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 32: 1300--1314

2023
[65]

Tian, Y.; Yan, Y.; Zhai, G.; Guo, G.; and Gao, Z. 2022. Ean: event adaptive network for enhanced action recognition. International Journal of Computer Vision, 130(10): 2453--2471

2022
[66]

N.; Kaiser, .; and Polosukhin, I

Vaswani, A.; Shazeer, N.; Parmar, N.; Uszkoreit, J.; Jones, L.; Gomez, A. N.; Kaiser, .; and Polosukhin, I. 2017. Attention is all you need. Advances in neural information processing systems, 30

2017
[67]

Wang, H.; Wang, Y.; Zhou, Z.; Ji, X.; Gong, D.; Zhou, J.; Li, Z.; and Liu, W. 2018. Cosface: Large margin cosine loss for deep face recognition. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 5265--5274

2018
[68]

Wen, Y.; Liu, B.; Cao, J.; Xie, R.; and Song, L. 2023. Divide and conquer: a two-step method for high quality face de-identification with model explainability. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, 5148--5157

2023
[69]

Yan, Z.; Li, S.; Zhao, R.; Tian, Y.; and Zhao, Y. 2023. DHBE: data-free holistic backdoor erasing in deep neural networks via restricted adversarial distillation. In Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Asia Conference on Computer and Communications Security, 731--745

2023
[70]

Yang, Y.; Lyu, J.; Wang, R.; Wen, Q.; Zhao, L.; Chen, W.; Bi, S.; Meng, J.; Mao, K.; Xiao, Y.; et al. 2022. A digital mask to safeguard patient privacy. Nature medicine, 28(9): 1883--1892

2022
[71]

Ye, H.; Zhang, J.; Liu, S.; Han, X.; and Yang, W. 2023. Ip-adapter: Text compatible image prompt adapter for text-to-image diffusion models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.06721

2023 arXiv
[72]

Yi, D.; Lei, Z.; Liao, S.; and Li, S. Z. 2014. Learning face representation from scratch. arXiv preprint arXiv:1411.7923

2014 arXiv
[73]

Yi, F.; Chen, M.; Sun, W.; Min, X.; Tian, Y.; and Zhai, G. 2021. Attention based network for no-reference UGC video quality assessment. In 2021 IEEE international conference on image processing (ICIP), 1414--1418. IEEE

2021
[74]

Yi, X.; Jiang, Q.; and Zhou, W. 2024. No-reference quality assessment of underwater image enhancement. Displays, 81: 102586

2024
[75]

Zhang, J.; Huang, J.; Jin, S.; and Lu, S. 2024. Vision-language models for vision tasks: A survey. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence

2024
[76]

A.; Shechtman, E.; and Wang, O

Zhang, R.; Isola, P.; Efros, A. A.; Shechtman, E.; and Wang, O. 2018. The unreasonable effectiveness of deep features as a perceptual metric. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 586--595

2018
[77]

, " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter edition editor eid eprint howpublished institution isbn journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type volume year label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all...
[78]

write newline

" write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 gl...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

A.; Hempel, T.; Khalifa, A.; Al-Hamadi, A.; and Dinges, L

Abdelrahman, A. A.; Hempel, T.; Khalifa, A.; Al-Hamadi, A.; and Dinges, L. 2023. L2cs-net: Fine-grained gaze estimation in unconstrained environments. In 2023 8th International Conference on Frontiers of Signal Processing (ICFSP), 98--102. IEEE

work page 2023

[2] [2]

Banerjee, M.; Capozzoli, M.; McSweeney, L.; and Sinha, D. 1999. Beyond kappa: A review of interrater agreement measures. Canadian journal of statistics, 27(1): 3--23

work page 1999

[3] [3]

S.; and Wu, Z

Cai, Z.; Gao, Z.; Planche, B.; Zheng, M.; Chen, T.; Asif, M. S.; and Wu, Z. 2024. Disguise without disruption: Utility-preserving face de-identification. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, volume 38, 918--926

work page 2024

[4] [4]

Cao, J.; Liu, B.; Wen, Y.; Xie, R.; and Song, L. 2021. Personalized and invertible face de-identification by disentangled identity information manipulation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, 3334--3342

work page 2021

[5] [5]

M.; and Zisserman, A

Cao, Q.; Shen, L.; Xie, W.; Parkhi, O. M.; and Zisserman, A. 2018. Vggface2: A dataset for recognising faces across pose and age. In 2018 13th IEEE international conference on automatic face & gesture recognition (FG 2018), 67--74. IEEE

2018

[6] [6]

Chen, H.; Qu, Z.; Tian, Y.; Jiang, N.; Qin, Y.; Gao, J.; Zhang, R.; Ma, Y.; Jin, Z.; and Zhai, G. 2024 a . A cross-temporal multimodal fusion system based on deep learning for orthodontic monitoring. Computers in Biology and Medicine, 180: 109025

work page 2024

[7] [7]

Chen, Z.; Sun, W.; Tian, Y.; Jia, J.; Zhang, Z.; Wang, J.; Huang, R.; Min, X.; Zhai, G.; and Zhang, W. 2024 b . GAIA: Rethinking Action Quality Assessment for AI-Generated Videos. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.06087

arXiv 2024

[8] [8]

Deng, J.; Guo, J.; Xue, N.; and Zafeiriou, S. 2019. Arcface: Additive angular margin loss for deep face recognition. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 4690--4699

2019