# Data-Efficient Vision Transformers for Multi-Label Disease Classification on Chest Radiographs

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2208.08166 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2208.08166/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 7 of its 12 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 17 Aug 2022.

## Builds on (most cited first, 7 of 7)

- [Attention Is All You Need](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.03762/) (2017)
- [Training data-efficient image transformers & distillation through attention](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2012.12877/) (2020)
- [RandAugment: Practical automated data augmentation with a reduced search space](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.13719/) (2019)
- [CheXpert: A Large Chest Radiograph Dataset with Uncertainty Labels and Expert Comparison](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1901.07031/) (2019)
- [A Survey on Deep Learning in Medical Image Analysis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1702.05747/) (2017)
- [Convolutional Networks with Dense Connectivity](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2001.02394/) (2020)
- [Deep Learning for Chest X-ray Analysis: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.08700/) (2021)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Radiographs are a versatile diagnostic tool for the detection and assessment of pathologies, for treatment planning or for navigation and localization purposes in clinical interventions. However, their interpretation and assessment by radiologists can be tedious and error-prone. Thus, a wide variety of deep learning methods have been proposed to support radiologists interpreting radiographs. Mostly, these approaches rely on convolutional neural networks (CNN) to extract features from images. Especially for the multi-label classification of pathologies on chest radiographs (Chest X-Rays, CXR), CNNs have proven to be well suited. On the Contrary, Vision Transformers (ViTs) have not been applied to this task despite their high classification performance on generic images and interpretable local saliency maps which could add value to clinical interventions. ViTs do not rely on convolutions but on patch-based self-attention and in contrast to CNNs, no prior knowledge of local connectivity is present. While this leads to increased capacity, ViTs typically require an excessive amount of training data which represents a hurdle in the medical domain as high costs are associated with collecting large medical data sets. In this work, we systematically compare the classification performance of ViTs and CNNs for different data set sizes and evaluate more data-efficient ViT variants (DeiT). Our results show that while the performance between ViTs and CNNs is on par with a small benefit for ViTs, DeiTs outperform the former if a reasonably large data set is available for training.