mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Distilling CT Foundation Models into Editable Concept Bottlenecks for Lung Nodule Malignancy Prediction

arXiv 2608.07857 ↗First posted 8 Aug 2026cs.CV cs.AIcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Foundation models provide transferable CT representations, but predictions based directly on these embeddings are difficult to interpret. We developed concept bottleneck models that map two frozen CT foundation-model representations to eight radiologist-defined pulmonary-nodule attributes and predict malignancy from the estimated concepts and nodule size. The models included CT-FM, a whole-CT self-supervised encoder using a 96^3-voxel nodule-centered patch, and FMCIB, a nodule-focused contrastive encoder using a 50-mm crop. Eight ridge-regression concept heads were trained on 2,610 LIDC-IDRI nodules. Malignancy models were trained on LUNA25 and evaluated on a held-out internal test set and the external DLCS cohort. Concept fidelity was assessed using five-fold cross-validated R^2, and malignancy discrimination was assessed using AUROC with 95% confidence intervals estimated by patient-grouped bootstrap resampling. Concept fidelity was modest but higher for FMCIB than CT-FM for subtlety (R2, 0.24 vs. 0.11), spiculation (0.17 vs. 0.08), texture (0.17 vs. 0.07), and lobulation (0.15 vs. 0.05). Internally, the CT-FM and FMCIB concept+size models achieved AUROCs of 0.86 (95% CI, 0.80-0.92) and 0.86 (0.79-0.92), respectively. Externally, AUROCs were 0.72 (0.68-0.75) and 0.73 (0.70-0.76), compared with 0.73 for nodule size alone and 0.60 and 0.67 for the corresponding embedding only probes. Additive predictions could be decomposed into feature-level contributions and modified through controlled concept interventions. Concept bottlenecks provided transparent malignancy predictions with discrimination similar to nodule size alone, while differences in concept fidelity suggest that concept recovery depends on the underlying foundation-model representation.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 5 of its 11 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Aug 2026.

Builds on

5 of 11 references.

References · 5

  1. 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,555
  2. 2020Concept Bottleneck Modelscited by 1,032
  3. 2019InterpretML: A Unified Framework for Machine Learning Interpretabilitycited by 246
  4. 2025Vision Foundation Models for Computed Tomographycited by 47
  5. 2024Reproducible Benchmarking for Lung Nodule Detection and Malignancy Classification Across Multiple Low-Dose CT Datasetscited by 4

Built on by

Not cited yet.