Researcher profile

Eduardo Valle

Eduardo Valle contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 19 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
5works
0followers
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

5 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

An Evaluation of Self-Supervised Pre-Training for Skin-Lesion Analysis

Self-supervised pre-training appears as an advantageous alternative to supervised pre-trained for transfer learning. By synthesizing annotations on pretext tasks, self-supervision allows to pre-train models on large amounts of pseudo-labels before fine-tuning them on the target task. In this work, we assess self-supervision for the diagnosis of skin lesions, comparing three self-supervised pipelines to a challenging supervised baseline, on five test datasets comprising in- and out-of-distribution samples. Our results show that self-supervision is competitive both in improving accuracies and in reducing the variability of outcomes. Self-supervision proves particularly useful for low training data scenarios ($<1\,500$ and $<150$ samples), where its ability to stabilize the outcomes is essential to provide sound results.

preprint2022arXiv

Artifact-Based Domain Generalization of Skin Lesion Models

Deep Learning failure cases are abundant, particularly in the medical area. Recent studies in out-of-distribution generalization have advanced considerably on well-controlled synthetic datasets, but they do not represent medical imaging contexts. We propose a pipeline that relies on artifacts annotation to enable generalization evaluation and debiasing for the challenging skin lesion analysis context. First, we partition the data into levels of increasingly higher biased training and test sets for better generalization assessment. Then, we create environments based on skin lesion artifacts to enable domain generalization methods. Finally, after robust training, we perform a test-time debiasing procedure, reducing spurious features in inference images. Our experiments show our pipeline improves performance metrics in biased cases, and avoids artifacts when using explanation methods. Still, when evaluating such models in out-of-distribution data, they did not prefer clinically-meaningful features. Instead, performance only improved in test sets that present similar artifacts from training, suggesting models learned to ignore the known set of artifacts. Our results raise a concern that debiasing models towards a single aspect may not be enough for fair skin lesion analysis.

preprint2020arXiv

Debiasing Skin Lesion Datasets and Models? Not So Fast

Data-driven models are now deployed in a plethora of real-world applications - including automated diagnosis - but models learned from data risk learning biases from that same data. When models learn spurious correlations not found in real-world situations, their deployment for critical tasks, such as medical decisions, can be catastrophic. In this work we address this issue for skin-lesion classification models, with two objectives: finding out what are the spurious correlations exploited by biased networks, and debiasing the models by removing such spurious correlations from them. We perform a systematic integrated analysis of 7 visual artifacts (which are possible sources of biases exploitable by networks), employ a state-of-the-art technique to prevent the models from learning spurious correlations, and propose datasets to test models for the presence of bias. We find out that, despite interesting results that point to promising future research, current debiasing methods are not ready to solve the bias issue for skin-lesion models.

preprint2020arXiv

Insights from the Future for Continual Learning

Continual learning aims to learn tasks sequentially, with (often severe) constraints on the storage of old learning samples, without suffering from catastrophic forgetting. In this work, we propose prescient continual learning, a novel experimental setting, to incorporate existing information about the classes, prior to any training data. Usually, each task in a traditional continual learning setting evaluates the model on present and past classes, the latter with a limited number of training samples. Our setting adds future classes, with no training samples at all. We introduce Ghost Model, a representation-learning-based model for continual learning using ideas from zero-shot learning. A generative model of the representation space in concert with a careful adjustment of the losses allows us to exploit insights from future classes to constraint the spatial arrangement of the past and current classes. Quantitative results on the AwA2 and aP\&Y datasets and detailed visualizations showcase the interest of this new setting and the method we propose to address it.

preprint2020arXiv

Less is More: Sample Selection and Label Conditioning Improve Skin Lesion Segmentation

Segmenting skin lesions images is relevant both for itself and for assisting in lesion classification, but suffers from the challenge in obtaining annotated data. In this work, we show that segmentation may improve with less data, by selecting the training samples with best inter-annotator agreement, and conditioning the ground-truth masks to remove excessive detail. We perform an exhaustive experimental design considering several sources of variation, including three different test sets, two different deep-learning architectures, and several replications, for a total of 540 experimental runs. We found that sample selection and detail removal may have impacts corresponding, respectively, to 12% and 16% of the one obtained by picking a better deep-learning model.