Paper detail

CheXpert++: Approximating the CheXpert labeler for Speed,Differentiability, and Probabilistic Output

It is often infeasible or impossible to obtain ground truth labels for medical data. To circumvent this, one may build rule-based or other expert-knowledge driven labelers to ingest data and yield silver labels absent any ground-truth training data. One popular such labeler is CheXpert, a labeler that produces diagnostic labels for chest X-ray radiology reports. CheXpert is very useful, but is relatively computationally slow, especially when integrated with end-to-end neural pipelines, is non-differentiable so can't be used in any applications that require gradients to flow through the labeler, and does not yield probabilistic outputs, which limits our ability to improve the quality of the silver labeler through techniques such as active learning. In this work, we solve all three of these problems with $\texttt{CheXpert++}$, a BERT-based, high-fidelity approximation to CheXpert. $\texttt{CheXpert++}$ achieves 99.81\% parity with CheXpert, which means it can be reliably used as a drop-in replacement for CheXpert, all while being significantly faster, fully differentiable, and probabilistic in output. Error analysis of $\texttt{CheXpert++}$ also demonstrates that $\texttt{CheXpert++}$ has a tendency to actually correct errors in the CheXpert labels, with $\texttt{CheXpert++}$ labels being more often preferred by a clinician over CheXpert labels (when they disagree) on all but one disease task. To further demonstrate the utility of these advantages in this model, we conduct a proof-of-concept active learning study, demonstrating we can improve accuracy on an expert labeled random subset of report sentences by approximately 8\% over raw, unaltered CheXpert by using one-iteration of active-learning inspired re-training. These findings suggest that simple techniques in co-learning and active learning can yield high-quality labelers under minimal, and controllable human labeling demands.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.