Towards Reliable AI-Based Histological Staining: A Systematic Study of Scaling and Uncertainty in Unpaired Generative Models
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Liver fibrosis, the principal predictor of long-term outcome in chronic liver disease, is staged from histological estimates of collagen content. Sirius Red (SR) provides the standard quantitative readout (collagen proportionate area, CPA) but is not acquired at every clinical centre and consumes tissue, time, and reagent cost beyond the routine Hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) stain. AI-based virtual staining can generate SR directly from H&E, yet systematic benchmarks of unsupervised models are scarce and their predictive uncertainty has not been quantified, even though visually plausible outputs may not faithfully reproduce the underlying tissue structure. We therefore benchmark six unsupervised image-to-image architectures (GAN-based and diffusion-based) across 54 scaling configurations on a newly released paired H&E to SR mouse liver dataset, the first open resource for this translation task. Each configuration is evaluated jointly on perceptual, distributional, and task-specific axes plus a blinded expert reader study; the best per family is then retrained as a deep ensemble, the first systematic comparison of epistemic uncertainty across unsupervised stain-to-stain architectures. Across families, perceptual quality, task-specific error, and ensemble agreement measure largely independent axes of model fitness: GAN-based methods cluster tightly on perceptual metrics yet differ substantially on task error and ensemble agreement, while the diffusion-based method (CycleDiffusion) is qualitatively different on all three. No single metric captures these differences, so reliable virtual staining requires reporting and selecting on all three jointly. The dataset, tiling pipeline, models, and evaluation code are released publicly.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 22 of its 52 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 Aug 2026.
Builds on
22 of 52 references.
References · 22
- 2020Denoising Diffusion Probabilistic Modelscited by 21,076
- 2018The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Deep Features as a Perceptual Metriccited by 11,177
- 2020Denoising Diffusion Implicit Modelscited by 9,781
- 2018Representation Learning with Contrastive Predictive Codingcited by 7,777
- 2017On Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 4,960
- 2016Image-to-Image Translation with Conditional Adversarial Networkscited by 4,527
- 2015Dropout as a Bayesian Approximation: Representing Model Uncertainty in Deep Learningcited by 4,448
- 2016Simple and Scalable Predictive Uncertainty Estimation using Deep Ensemblescited by 3,926
- 2016Least Squares Generative Adversarial Networkscited by 1,001
- 2018Multimodal Unsupervised Image-to-Image Translationcited by 795
- 2017Unsupervised Image-to-Image Translation Networkscited by 603
- 2020ReZero is All You Need: Fast Convergence at Large Depthcited by 264
10 more
- 2024Arbitrary-steps Image Super-resolution via Diffusion Inversioncited by 86
- 2021Dual Contrastive Learning for Unsupervised Image-to-Image Translationcited by 66
- 2020Deep learning-based transformation of the H&E stain into special stainscited by 55
- 2022UVCGAN: UNet Vision Transformer cycle-consistent GAN for unpaired image-to-image translationcited by 42
- 2022Uncertainty-Informed Deep Learning Models Enable High-Confidence Predictions for Digital Histopathologycited by 37
- 2021Robustness via Uncertainty-aware Cycle Consistencycited by 16
- 2024StainDiffuser: MultiTask Dual Diffusion Model for Virtual Stainingcited by 11
- 2024F2FLDM: Latent Diffusion Models with Histopathology Pre-Trained Embeddings for Unpaired Frozen Section to FFPE Translationcited by 6
- 2025Trustworthy image-to-image translation: evaluating uncertainty calibration in unpaired training scenarioscited by 4
- 2023Uncertainty Estimation in Instance Segmentation with Star-convex Shapescited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.