When Do Cheap Probes Predict Expensive Training? Probing 3D-CT Encoders for Text Generation
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Building a 3D CT vision language model begins with a choice of which image encoder to build on. Today that choice is made by fine-tuning every candidate through the full language model and comparing downstream scores, an enormously expensive search. A cheap probe on the encoder's representation promises a way out, but whether it forecasts the expensive outcome has never been tested. We test this with CheapCT on report generation and on MeasureVQA, a new VQA dataset we build. MeasureVQA scores the outcome one capability at a time, its answers measured from segmentation masks and Hounsfield units. Report generation scores the whole report at once and reflects mostly disease. CheapCT forecasts expensive training across every capability. The forecast survives changing the probe readout and the language-model backbone. The rank agreement between CheapCT and fine-tuning stays high throughout, from rho = 0.90 to 0.97. Used to choose an encoder, CheapCT picks one nearly as good as the best while fine-tuning a single candidate, at orders of magnitude less compute. We release the code and MeasureVQA at https://github.com/renjie-liang/CheapCT.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 33 of its 58 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 Jul 2026.
Builds on
33 of 58 references.
References · 33
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
- 2021LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language Modelscited by 14,380
- 2023Visual Instruction Tuningcited by 7,869
- 2025Gemma 3 Technical Reportcited by 1,824
- 2016Understanding intermediate layers using linear classifier probescited by 1,353
- 2018Attention-based Deep Multiple Instance Learningcited by 1,095
- 2022TotalSegmentator: robust segmentation of 104 anatomical structures in CT imagescited by 613
- 2018Do Better ImageNet Models Transfer Better?cited by 565
- 2025MedGemma Technical Reportcited by 436
- 2020Neural Architecture Search without Trainingcited by 244
- 2020How Well Do Self-Supervised Models Transfer?cited by 213
- 2021Zero-Cost Proxies for Lightweight NAScited by 199
21 more
- 2024Generalist Foundation Models from a Multimodal Dataset for 3D Computed Tomographycited by 199
- 2020LEEP: A New Measure to Evaluate Transferability of Learned Representationscited by 188
- 2021LogME: Practical Assessment of Pre-trained Models for Transfer Learningcited by 172
- 2024M3D: Advancing 3D Medical Image Analysis with Multi-Modal Large Language Modelscited by 162
- 2019Models Genesis: Generic Autodidactic Models for 3D Medical Image Analysiscited by 159
- 2024GREEN: Generative Radiology Report Evaluation and Error Notationcited by 128
- 2024CT2Rep: Automated Radiology Report Generation for 3D Medical Imagingcited by 96
- 2024VoCo: A Simple-yet-Effective Volume Contrastive Learning Framework for 3D Medical Image Analysiscited by 75
- 2025Large-scale and Fine-grained Vision-language Pre-training for Enhanced CT Image Understandingcited by 54
- 2025Vision Foundation Models for Computed Tomographycited by 47
- 2025Med3DVLM: An Efficient Vision-Language Model for 3D Medical Image Analysiscited by 46
- 2024RadGenome-Chest CT: A Grounded Vision-Language Dataset for Chest CT Analysiscited by 42
- 2014A Weighted Correlation Index for Rankings with Tiescited by 41
- 2023Evaluating General Purpose Vision Foundation Models for Medical Image Analysis: An Experimental Study of DINOv2 on Radiology Benchmarkscited by 33
- 2020Models Genesiscited by 26
- 2025Comprehensive language-image pre-training for 3D medical image understandingcited by 22
- 2025Better Tokens for Better 3D: Advancing Vision-Language Modeling in 3D Medical Imagingcited by 20
- 2025How Well Do Supervised 3D Models Transfer to Medical Imaging Tasks?cited by 19
- 2025Boosting Vision Semantic Density with Anatomy Normality Modeling for Medical Vision-language Pre-trainingcited by 14
- 2022Predicting Fine-Tuning Performance with Probingcited by 13
- 2026Beyond the Embedding Bottleneck: Adaptive Retrieval-Augmented 3D CT Report Generationcited by 3
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2024Argus: Benchmarking and Enhancing Vision-Language Models for 3D Radiology Report Generation
- 2026Resolution Meets Reduction: Efficient Visual Context for 3D Radiology Report Generation
- 2026Sparse Concept Channels in Frozen 3D CT Vision Encoders
- 2023GenerateCT: Text-Conditional Generation of 3D Chest CT Volumes
- 2026Unleashing Video Language Models for Fine-grained HRCT Report Generation
- 2026NV-Reason-CT: 3D Visual Language Model for CT Analysis
- 2025Exploring the Design Space of 3D MLLMs for CT Report Generation
- 2026Clinical Reasoning Under a Partially Observed Objective in Cone Beam CT Report Generation