Researcher profile

Prasanth Ganesan

Prasanth Ganesan contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 11 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
1works
0followers
3topics
2close 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

1 published item(s)

preprint2021arXiv

Does deep learning model calibration improve performance in class-imbalanced medical image classification?

In medical image classification tasks, it is common to find that the number of normal samples far exceeds the number of abnormal samples. In such class-imbalanced situations, reliable training of deep neural networks continues to be a major challenge. Under these circumstances, the predicted class probabilities may be biased toward the majority class. Calibration has been suggested to alleviate some of these effects. However, there is insufficient analysis explaining when and whether calibrating a model would be beneficial in improving performance. In this study, we perform a systematic analysis of the effect of model calibration on its performance on two medical image modalities, namely, chest X-rays and fundus images, using various deep learning classifier backbones. For this, we study the following variations: (i) the degree of imbalances in the dataset used for training; (ii) calibration methods; and (iii) two classification thresholds, namely, default decision threshold of 0.5, and optimal threshold from precision-recall curves. Our results indicate that at the default operating threshold of 0.5, the performance achieved through calibration is significantly superior (p < 0.05) to using uncalibrated probabilities. However, at the PR-guided threshold, these gains are not significantly different (p > 0.05). This finding holds for both image modalities and at varying degrees of imbalance.