An Extensive Study on Cross-Dataset Bias and Evaluation Metrics Interpretation for Machine Learning applied to Gastrointestinal Tract Abnormality Classification
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Precise and efficient automated identification of Gastrointestinal (GI) tract diseases can help doctors treat more patients and improve the rate of disease detection and identification. Currently, automatic analysis of diseases in the GI tract is a hot topic in both computer science and medical-related journals. Nevertheless, the evaluation of such an automatic analysis is often incomplete or simply wrong. Algorithms are often only tested on small and biased datasets, and cross-dataset evaluations are rarely performed. A clear understanding of evaluation metrics and machine learning models with cross datasets is crucial to bring research in the field to a new quality level. Towards this goal, we present comprehensive evaluations of five distinct machine learning models using Global Features and Deep Neural Networks that can classify 16 different key types of GI tract conditions, including pathological findings, anatomical landmarks, polyp removal conditions, and normal findings from images captured by common GI tract examination instruments. In our evaluation, we introduce performance hexagons using six performance metrics such as recall, precision, specificity, accuracy, F1-score, and Matthews Correlation Coefficient to demonstrate how to determine the real capabilities of models rather than evaluating them shallowly. Furthermore, we perform cross-dataset evaluations using different datasets for training and testing. With these cross-dataset evaluations, we demonstrate the challenge of actually building a generalizable model that could be used across different hospitals. Our experiments clearly show that more sophisticated performance metrics and evaluation methods need to be applied to get reliable models rather than depending on evaluations of the splits of the same dataset, i.e., the performance metrics should always be interpreted together rather than relying on a single metric.
Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 8 May 2020.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 3; 2022: 1; 2023: 2; 2024: 1.
7 papers.
- 2024A Closer Look at AUROC and AUPRC under Class Imbalancecited by 56
- 2023Mask-conditioned latent diffusion for generating gastrointestinal polyp imagescited by 16
- 2021DivergentNets: Medical Image Segmentation by Network Ensemblecited by 7
- 2021Explaining medical AI performance disparities across sites with confounder Shapley value analysiscited by 7
- 2021LightLayers: Parameter Efficient Dense and Convolutional Layers for Image Classificationcited by 4
- 2022Segmentation Consistency Training: Out-of-Distribution Generalization for Medical Image Segmentationcited by 2
- 2023Unveiling Document Structures with YOLOv5 Layout Detectioncited by 1
- 2024A Closer Look at AUROC and AUPRC under Class Imbalance11 Jan 2024
- 2023Unveiling Document Structures with YOLOv5 Layout Detection29 Sep 2023
- 2023Mask-conditioned latent diffusion for generating gastrointestinal polyp images11 Apr 2023
- 2022Segmentation Consistency Training: Out-of-Distribution Generalization for Medical Image Segmentation30 May 2022
- 2021Explaining medical AI performance disparities across sites with confounder Shapley value analysis12 Nov 2021
- 2021DivergentNets: Medical Image Segmentation by Network Ensemble1 Jul 2021
- 2021LightLayers: Parameter Efficient Dense and Convolutional Layers for Image Classification6 Jan 2021