# Robustness of transferability estimation metrics for medical imaging

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.09999 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.09999/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 23 of its 32 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 7 Aug 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 23 of 23)

- [Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1512.03385/) (2015)
- [PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Library](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1912.01703/) (2019)
- [SGDR: Stochastic Gradient Descent with Warm Restarts](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1608.03983/) (2016)
- [Optuna: A Next-generation Hyperparameter Optimization Framework](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1907.10902/) (2019)
- [MedMNIST v2 -- A large-scale lightweight benchmark for 2D and 3D biomedical image classification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.14795/) (2021)
- [Rotation Equivariant CNNs for Digital Pathology](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1806.03962/) (2018)
- [Transfusion: Understanding Transfer Learning for Medical Imaging](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1902.07208/) (2019)
- [LEEP: A New Measure to Evaluate Transferability of Learned Representations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2002.12462/) (2020)
- [Not-so-supervised: a survey of semi-supervised, multi-instance, and transfer learning in medical image analysis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1804.06353/) (2018)
- [LogME: Practical Assessment of Pre-trained Models for Transfer Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2102.11005/) (2021)
- [Carbontracker: Tracking and Predicting the Carbon Footprint of Training Deep Learning Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2007.03051/) (2020)
- [Transferability and Hardness of Supervised Classification Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1908.08142/) (2019)
- [An Information-Theoretic Approach to Transferability in Task Transfer Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.10082/) (2022)
- [Factors of Influence for Transfer Learning across Diverse Appearance Domains and Task Types](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.13318/) (2021)
- [Transferability Estimation using Bhattacharyya Class Separability](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2111.12780/) (2021)
- [Ranking Neural Checkpoints](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2011.11200/) (2020)
- [Scalable Diverse Model Selection for Accessible Transfer Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2111.06977/) (2021)
- [How stable are Transferability Metrics evaluations?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.01403/) (2022)
- [Not All Models Are Equal: Predicting Model Transferability in a Self-challenging Fisher Space](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2207.03036/) (2022)
- [Data Representativity for Machine Learning and AI Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.04706/) (2022)
- [The Performance of Transferability Metrics does not Translate to Medical Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.07444/) (2023)
- [On dataset transferability in medical image classification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.20172/) (2024)
- [From pre-training to downstream performance: Does domain-specific pre-training make sense?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.08819/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

In transfer learning, the choice of source model largely influences the performance on a target dataset. Still, selecting a fitting source remains a challenging task, especially in medical imaging where one has to decide between models pre-trained on off-the-shelf options, such as ImageNet, and domain specific datasets. Transferability estimation (TE) metrics address this problem by aiming to predict the best performing source model in a computationally cost effective way. However, previous work has reported conflicting TE metric performances due to differences in experimental setups. Moreover, most TE metrics are designed for and evaluated on natural images, while being optimized for accuracy, whereas in medical imaging metrics that are more robust to class imbalance are typically used. We study the impact of varying the target dataset as an isolated factor, by constructing miniature populations of different sample sizes and random seeds. In addition, we investigate the influence of the evaluation metric used to obtain the reference ranking. We find that small modifications to the target dataset change the rankings. Furthermore, we show that the choice of evaluation metric affects the reference rankings and therefore the evaluation of TE metrics. Overall, we observe a low agreement between rankings from TE metrics and reference. The code, model checkpoints and data splits used in this work are available through https://github.com/niclasclassen/robustness-of-transferability-estimation-metrics-for-medical-imaging.