Paper detail

ROOD-MRI: Benchmarking the robustness of deep learning segmentation models to out-of-distribution and corrupted data in MRI

Deep artificial neural networks (DNNs) have moved to the forefront of medical image analysis due to their success in classification, segmentation, and detection challenges. A principal challenge in large-scale deployment of DNNs in neuroimage analysis is the potential for shifts in signal-to-noise ratio, contrast, resolution, and presence of artifacts from site to site due to variances in scanners and acquisition protocols. DNNs are famously susceptible to these distribution shifts in computer vision. Currently, there are no benchmarking platforms or frameworks to assess the robustness of new and existing models to specific distribution shifts in MRI, and accessible multi-site benchmarking datasets are still scarce or task-specific. To address these limitations, we propose ROOD-MRI: a platform for benchmarking the Robustness of DNNs to Out-Of-Distribution (OOD) data, corruptions, and artifacts in MRI. The platform provides modules for generating benchmarking datasets using transforms that model distribution shifts in MRI, implementations of newly derived benchmarking metrics for image segmentation, and examples for using the methodology with new models and tasks. We apply our methodology to hippocampus, ventricle, and white matter hyperintensity segmentation in several large studies, providing the hippocampus dataset as a publicly available benchmark. By evaluating modern DNNs on these datasets, we demonstrate that they are highly susceptible to distribution shifts and corruptions in MRI. We show that while data augmentation strategies can substantially improve robustness to OOD data for anatomical segmentation tasks, modern DNNs using augmentation still lack robustness in more challenging lesion-based segmentation tasks. We finally benchmark U-Nets and transformer-based models, finding consistent differences in robustness to particular classes of transforms across architectures.

preprint2022arXivOpen 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.

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.