mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Counterfactual Stress Testing for Image Classification Models

arXiv 2605.10894 ↗First posted 11 May 2026cs.CVcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Deep learning models in medical imaging often fail when deployed in new clinical environments due to distribution shifts in demographics, scanner hardware, or acquisition protocols. A central challenge is underspecification, where models with similar validation performance exhibit divergent real-world failure modes. Although stress testing has emerged as a tool to assess this, current methods typically rely on simple, uninformed perturbations (e.g., brightness or contrast changes), which fail to capture clinically realistic variation and can overestimate robustness. In this work, we introduce a counterfactual stress testing framework based on causal generative models that create realistic "what if" images by intervening on attributes such as scanner type and recorded sex while largely preserving anatomical identity, enabling controlled and semantically meaningful evaluation under targeted distribution shifts. Across two imaging modalities (chest X-ray and mammography), three model architectures, and multiple shift scenarios, we show that counterfactual stress tests provide a substantially more accurate proxy for real out-of-distribution performance than classical perturbations, capturing the direction and relative magnitude of performance changes and showing stronger overall rank agreement. These results suggest that causal generative models can provide informative synthetic stress tests for assessing robustness under targeted distribution shifts prior to deployment.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 21 of its 26 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 May 2026.

Builds on

21 of 26 references.

References · 21

  1. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 52,096
  2. 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 37,240
  3. 2020An Image is Worth 16x16 Words: Transformers for Image Recognition at Scalecited by 30,186
  4. 2016Densely Connected Convolutional Networkscited by 6,720
  5. 2019Benchmarking Neural Network Robustness to Common Corruptions and Perturbationscited by 2,877
  6. 2020Underspecification Presents Challenges for Credibility in Modern Machine Learningcited by 496
  7. 2019PadChest: A large chest x-ray image dataset with multi-label annotated reportscited by 309
  8. 2020Deep Structural Causal Models for Tractable Counterfactual Inferencecited by 211
  9. 2019Causality matters in medical imagingcited by 193
  10. 2022Deep End-to-end Causal Inferencecited by 95
  11. 2023Generative models improve fairness of medical classifiers under distribution shiftscited by 90
  12. 2023High Fidelity Image Counterfactuals with Probabilistic Causal Modelscited by 53
9 more
  1. 2023Measuring axiomatic soundness of counterfactual image modelscited by 34
  2. 2023RadEdit: stress-testing biomedical vision models via diffusion image editingcited by 28
  3. 2024Benchmarking Counterfactual Image Generationcited by 22
  4. 2024Robust image representations with counterfactual contrastive learningcited by 14
  5. 2025CF-Seg: Counterfactuals meet Segmentationcited by 10
  6. 2024Rethinking Fair Representation Learning for Performance-Sensitive Taskscited by 8
  7. 2025Counterfactual Identifiability via Dynamic Optimal Transportcited by 6
  8. 2023Robustness Stress Testing in Medical Image Classificationcited by 5
  9. 2026Pixel-level Counterfactual Contrastive Learning for Medical Image Segmentationcited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.