Are deep learning classification results obtained on CT scans fair and interpretable?

Journal: Physical and engineering sciences in medicine
Published Date:

Abstract

Following the great success of various deep learning methods in image and object classification, the biomedical image processing society is also overwhelmed with their applications to various automatic diagnosis cases. Unfortunately, most of the deep learning-based classification attempts in the literature solely focus on the aim of extreme accuracy scores, without considering interpretability, or patient-wise separation of training and test data. For example, most lung nodule classification papers using deep learning randomly shuffle data and split it into training, validation, and test sets, causing certain images from the Computed Tomography (CT) scan of a person to be in the training set, while other images of the same person to be in the validation or testing image sets. This can result in reporting misleading accuracy rates and the learning of irrelevant features, ultimately reducing the real-life usability of these models. When the deep neural networks trained on the traditional, unfair data shuffling method are challenged with new patient images, it is observed that the trained models perform poorly. In contrast, deep neural networks trained with strict patient-level separation maintain their accuracy rates even when new patient images are tested. Heat map visualizations of the activations of the deep neural networks trained with strict patient-level separation indicate a higher degree of focus on the relevant nodules. We argue that the research question posed in the title has a positive answer only if the deep neural networks are trained with images of patients that are strictly isolated from the validation and testing patient sets.

Authors

  • Mohamad M A Ashames
    Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Eskisehir Osmangazi University, Eskisehir, Turkey.
  • Ahmet Demir
    Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Eskisehir Osmangazi University, Eskisehir, Turkey.
  • Omer N Gerek
    Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Eskisehir Technical University, Eskisehir, Turkey.
  • Mehmet Fidan
    Vocational School of Transportation, Eskisehir Technical University, Eskisehir, Turkey.
  • M Bilginer Gulmezoglu
    Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Eskisehir Osmangazi University, Eskisehir, Turkey.
  • Semih Ergin
    Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Eskisehir Osmangazi University, Eskisehir, Turkey.
  • Rifat Edizkan
    Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Eskisehir Osmangazi University, Eskisehir, Turkey.
  • Mehmet Koc
    Department of Computer Engineering, Eskisehir Technical University, Eskisehir, Turkey. mehmetkoc@eskisehir.edu.tr.
  • Atalay Barkana
    Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Eskisehir Technical University, Eskisehir, Turkey.
  • Cuneyt Calisir
    Department of Radiology, Manisa Celal Bayar University, Manisa, Turkey.