mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Medical Imaging AI Competitions Lack Fairness

arXiv 2512.17581 ↗First posted 19 Dec 2025cs.CVcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Benchmarking competitions are central to the development of artificial intelligence (AI) in medical imaging, defining performance standards and shaping methodological progress. However, it remains unclear whether these benchmarks provide data that are sufficiently representative, accessible, and reusable to support clinically meaningful AI. In this work, we assess fairness along two complementary dimensions: (1) whether challenge datasets capture the diversity of real-world clinical data, and (2) whether they are accessible and legally reusable in line with the FAIR principles. To address this question, we conducted a large-scale systematic study of 249 biomedical image analysis challenges comprising 458 tasks across 19 imaging modalities. Our findings reveal limited representation across challenge datasets with respect to geographic location, imaging modalities, and problem types, raising concerns about how well current benchmarks reflect real-world clinical diversity. Despite their widespread influence, challenge datasets were frequently constrained by restrictive or ambiguous access conditions, inconsistent or non-compliant licensing practices, and incomplete documentation, limiting reproducibility and long-term reuse. Together, these shortcomings expose foundational fairness limitations in our benchmarking ecosystem and highlight a disconnect between leaderboard success and clinical relevance.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 15 of its 36 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 19 Dec 2025.

Builds on

15 of 36 references.

References · 15

  1. 2018Datasheets for Datasetscited by 1,371
  2. 2021The Medical Segmentation Decathloncited by 620
  3. 2022Metrics reloaded: Recommendations for image analysis validationcited by 190
  4. 2018Why rankings of biomedical image analysis competitions should be interpreted with carecited by 90
  5. 2019Methods and open-source toolkit for analyzing and visualizing challenge resultscited by 60
  6. 2019BIAS: Transparent reporting of biomedical image analysis challengescited by 57
  7. 2021Mitigating Dataset Harms Requires Stewardship: Lessons from 1000 Paperscited by 49
  8. 2021How I failed machine learning in medical imaging -- shortcomings and recommendationscited by 37
  9. 2024Copycats: the many lives of a publicly available medical imaging datasetcited by 5
  10. 2025False Promises in Medical Imaging AI? Assessing Validity of Outperformance Claimscited by 5
  11. 2017Climbing the Kaggle Leaderboard by Exploiting the Log-Loss Oraclecited by 4
  12. 2025Do Not Trust Licenses You See: Dataset Compliance Requires Massive-Scale AI-Powered Lifecycle Tracingcited by 3
3 more
  1. 2023Challenge Results Are Not Reproduciblecited by 2
  2. 2024[Citation needed] Data usage and citation practices in medical imaging conferencescited by 2
  3. 2025A Technical Policy Blueprint for Trustworthy Decentralized AIcited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.