Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Evangelia Christodoulou

Publications and source records attributed to Evangelia Christodoulou.

18 recordsLinked to original sources

Current validation practice undermines surgical AI development

Surgical data science (SDS) is rapidly advancing, yet clinical adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) in surgery remains limited, with inadequate validation as an important contributing factor. Existing validation practices often neglect the temporal and hierarchical structure of intraoperative videos, yielding misleading or clinically irrelevant results. We introduce a comprehensive catalogue of validation pitfalls in AI-based surgical video analysis, derived from a multi-stage Delphi process with 92 international experts. Pitfalls span three categories: (1) data, (2) metric selection/configuration, and (3) aggregation and reporting. A systematic review of surgical AI papers reveals that these pitfalls are widespread. Experiments on surgical video datasets show that ignoring temporal and hierarchical data structures can understate uncertainty, obscure critical failure modes, and alter algorithm rankings. To address these shortcomings, we provide consensus-based best practices compiled. Together, this work provides an evidence-based framework for rigorous validation of surgical video analysis algorithms, guiding benchmarking, reporting, regulatory review, and clinical translation.

q-bio.OT↗

HeiCo-FOCUS: A Clinically Grounded Dataset for Long-Context Video Understanding

Recent advances in Vision-Language Models (VLMs) have led to rapid progress in video understanding across a wide range of benchmark tasks. However, existing evaluations largely focus on short-term reasoning, failing to assess a critical capability: maintaining cumulative temporal consistency over extended time horizons. To close this evaluation gap, we introduce HeiCo-FOCUS, a clinically grounded dataset for evaluating long-context video understanding through the task of Foreign Object Contextual Understanding in Surgery. Built on a dataset of Heidelberg Colorectal surgeries, this task requires models to continuously track multiple objects as they are inserted, manipulated, occluded, and removed over procedures lasting up to hours. HeiCo-FOCUS comprises 30,000 visual question answering (VQA) pairs covering five core capabilities: object recognition, temporal grounding, aggregation, event and procedural understanding, and complex reasoning. The dataset was constructed through a rigorous multi-stage annotation pipeline involving large-scale crowd annotation and 39 surgical domain experts to ensure high quality and clinical relevance. To systematically probe model behavior, we introduce a multi-track evaluation framework that progressively increases temporal and contextual demands from single frames to full procedures. Experiments with ten frontier VLMs show that HeiCo-FOCUS tasks are far from solved: only around half of the models clearly outperform a text-only baseline. Across the video tracks, models perform best on event and procedural understanding (mean Accuracy: 56.5% across all models), while temporal grounding remains particularly challenging for all evaluated models (mean Accuracy: 19.7%). We therefore expect HeiCo-FOCUS to serve as a catalyst for the development of models capable of reliable, temporally consistent reasoning over hours-long videos.

cs.CV↗

nnFoundation: 3D Foundation Models for Radiology

Radiological artificial intelligence has advanced rapidly, yet most systems remain narrowly task-specific, data-intensive, and fragile under domain shift. Foundation models promise more transferable and data-efficient solutions, but existing approaches are limited in scale, evaluated narrowly, and often assume that a single pretrained model can support diverse downstream tasks. Here we present nnFoundation, complementary convolutional and transformer-based 3D radiological foundation models. Developed within the Human Radiome Project (THRP), nnFoundation is trained on 2.1 million CT, MRI, and PET image volumes from 125 institutional and public datasets. We evaluate them across 108 tasks spanning segmentation, detection, classification, report generation, and image retrieval, including evaluations under domain shift, by external partners and in low-data and low-compute regimes. Across all task types, our convolution- and transformer-based nnFoundation models consistently outperform both prior 3D foundation models and training from scratch, establishing state-of-the-art performance for radiological imaging. However, performance follows a consistent task-dependent structure: the convolutional nnFoundation model dominates spatially localized tasks, whereas the transformer-based nnFoundation model excels in tasks requiring global semantic reasoning and in frozen-feature settings. Dynamically aligning the foundation model topology with the dataset characteristics post-hoc further improves transfer across heterogeneous 3D settings. These results show that transferable 3D radiological performance is governed not by a single universal model, but by the interplay of scalable pretraining, complementary architectures, and dataset-aware adaptation. We release nnFoundation models integrated into nnU-Net and nnDetection, enabling immediate application across established radiology workflows.

cs.CV↗

Medical Imaging AI Competitions Lack Fairness

Benchmarking competitions are central to the development of artificial intelligence (AI) in medical imaging, defining performance standards and shaping methodological progress. However, it remains unclear whether these benchmarks provide data that are sufficiently representative, accessible, and reusable to support clinically meaningful AI. In this work, we assess fairness along two complementary dimensions: (1) whether challenge datasets capture the diversity of real-world clinical data, and (2) whether they are accessible and legally reusable in line with the FAIR principles. To address this question, we conducted a large-scale systematic study of 249 biomedical image analysis challenges comprising 458 tasks across 19 imaging modalities. Our findings reveal limited representation across challenge datasets with respect to geographic location, imaging modalities, and problem types, raising concerns about how well current benchmarks reflect real-world clinical diversity. Despite their widespread influence, challenge datasets were frequently constrained by restrictive or ambiguous access conditions, inconsistent or non-compliant licensing practices, and incomplete documentation, limiting reproducibility and long-term reuse. Together, these shortcomings expose foundational fairness limitations in our benchmarking ecosystem and highlight a disconnect between leaderboard success and clinical relevance.

cs.CV↗

Performance uncertainty in medical image analysis: a large-scale investigation of confidence intervals

Performance uncertainty quantification is essential for reliable validation and eventual clinical translation of medical imaging artificial intelligence (AI). Confidence intervals (CIs) play a central role in this process by indicating how precise a reported performance estimate is. Yet, due to the limited amount of work examining CI behavior in medical imaging, the community remains largely unaware of how many diverse CI methods exist and how they behave in specific settings. The purpose of this study is to close this gap. To this end, we conducted a large-scale empirical analysis across a total of 24 segmentation and classification tasks, using 19 trained models per task group, a broad spectrum of commonly used performance metrics, multiple aggregation strategies, and several widely adopted CI methods. Reliability (coverage) and precision (width) of each CI method were estimated across all settings to characterize their dependence on study characteristics. Our analysis revealed five principal findings: 1) the sample size required for reliable CIs varies from a few dozens to several thousands of cases depending on study parameters; 2) CI behavior is strongly affected by the choice of performance metric; 3) aggregation strategy substantially influences the reliability of CIs, e.g. they require more observations for macro than for micro; 4) the machine learning problem (segmentation versus classification) modulates these effects; 5) different CI methods are not equally reliable and precise depending on the use case. Finally, we derived practical implications of this study in the form of a decision tree which shall prove useful to the community. This paves the way for future consensus guidelines on reporting performance uncertainty.

cs.CV↗

6 Fingers, 1 Kidney: Natural Adversarial Medical Images Reveal Critical Weaknesses of Vision-Language Models

Vision-language models (VLMs) are increasingly integrated into clinical workflows. However, existing benchmarks primarily assess performance on common anatomical presentations and fail to capture the challenges posed by rare variants. To address this gap, we introduce AdversarialAnatomyBench, the first benchmark comprising naturally occurring rare anatomical variants across diverse imaging modalities and anatomical regions. We call such variants that violate learned priors about "typical" human anatomy natural adversarial anatomy. Benchmarking 25 state-of-the-art VLMs with AdversarialAnatomyBench yielded three key insights. First, when queried with basic medical perception tasks, mean accuracy dropped from 71% on typical to 28% on atypical anatomy. Even the best-performing models, GPT-5, Gemini 2.5 Pro, and Llama 4 Maverick, showed performance drops of 41-51%. Second, model errors closely mirrored expected anatomical biases. Third, neither model scaling nor interventions, including bias-aware prompting and test-time reasoning, resolved these issues. These findings highlight a critical limitation in current VLMs: their poor generalization to rare anatomical presentations. AdversarialAnatomyBench provides a foundation for systematically measuring and mitigating anatomical bias in multimodal medical artificial intelligence (AI) systems.

cs.CV↗

Towards Global AI-Driven Cervical Cancer Screening

The global elimination of cervical cancer is a key public health goal set by the World Health Organization (WHO), with screening programs reducing mortality by up to 80%. However, access to experts and biopsy services is limited in low- to middle-income countries (LMICs). Deep learning (DL)-based algorithms offer promising support for screening, but most existing approaches have been developed and validated on private datasets from single countries. We present the first DL-based approach to cervical cancer screening validated on data from multiple countries. Technically, we phrase the problem of detecting and classifying lesions in colposcopy images as a multi-task learning problem, in which we simultaneously perform image-level classification and lesion segmentation. Our model was trained on a private data set of acid stain colposcopy images with manually generated lesion segmentation masks and corresponding histopathological results, employing extensive data augmentation to address image variability. In an in-distribution validation with pathology results serving as ground truth, our algorithm outperformed medical experts (Balanced Accuracy: 0.68 vs 0.64) in CIN1- (Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 1 or lower) versus CIN2+ (grade 2 or higher) classification. External validation on four colposcopy data sets from four countries featuring radical differences in prevalence and patient characteristics yielded superior performance of our method compared to baseline methods. Performance variability across countries was high with AUC values ranging from 0.54 - 0.80. Overall, algorithm performance varied with age, transformation zone (cervical area most prone to lesion development), presence of comorbidities and pathognomonic signs, with comorbidities having by far the largest negative effect. Future work should focus on improving model robustness and generalizability.

cs.CV↗

Sequential sample size calculations and learning curves safeguard the robust development of a clinical prediction model for individuals

When prospectively developing a new clinical prediction model (CPM), fixed sample size calculations are typically conducted before data collection based on sensible assumptions. But if the assumptions are inaccurate the actual sample size required to develop a reliable model may be very different. To safeguard against this, adaptive sample size approaches have been proposed, based on sequential evaluation of a models predictive performance. Aim: illustrate and extend sequential sample size calculations for CPM development by (i) proposing stopping rules based on minimising uncertainty (instability) and misclassification of individual-level predictions, and (ii) showcasing how it safeguards against inaccurate fixed sample size calculations. Using the sequential approach repeats the pre-defined model development strategy every time a chosen number (e.g., 100) of participants are recruited and adequately followed up. At each stage, CPM performance is evaluated using bootstrapping, leading to prediction and classification stability statistics and plots, alongside optimism-adjusted measures of calibration and discrimination. Our approach is illustrated for development of acute kidney injury using logistic regression CPMs. The fixed sample size calculation, based on perceived sensible assumptions suggests recruiting 342 patients to minimise overfitting; however, the sequential approach reveals that a much larger sample size of 1100 is required to minimise overfitting (targeting population-level stability). If the stopping rule criteria also target small uncertainty and misclassification probability of individual predictions, the sequential approach suggests an even larger sample size (n=1800). Our sequential sample size approach allows users to dynamically monitor individual-level prediction and classification instability and safeguard against using inaccurate assumptions.

stat.ME↗

False Promises in Medical Imaging AI? Assessing Validity of Outperformance Claims

Performance comparisons are fundamental in medical imaging Artificial Intelligence (AI) research, often driving claims of superiority based on relative improvements in common performance metrics. However, such claims frequently rely solely on empirical mean performance. In this paper, we investigate whether newly proposed methods genuinely outperform the state of the art by analyzing a representative cohort of medical imaging papers. We quantify the probability of false claims based on a Bayesian approach that leverages reported results alongside empirically estimated model congruence to estimate whether the relative ranking of methods is likely to have occurred by chance. According to our results, the majority (>80%) of papers claims outperformance when introducing a new method. Our analysis further revealed a high probability (>5%) of false outperformance claims in 86% of classification papers and 53% of segmentation papers. These findings highlight a critical flaw in current benchmarking practices: claims of outperformance in medical imaging AI are frequently unsubstantiated, posing a risk of misdirecting future research efforts.

cs.CV↗

Challenging Vision-Language Models with Surgical Data: A New Dataset and Broad Benchmarking Study

While traditional computer vision models have historically struggled to generalize to endoscopic domains, the emergence of foundation models has shown promising cross-domain performance. In this work, we present the first large-scale study assessing the capabilities of Vision Language Models (VLMs) for endoscopic tasks with a specific focus on laparoscopic surgery. Using a diverse set of state-of-the-art models, multiple surgical datasets, and extensive human reference annotations, we address three key research questions: (1) Can current VLMs solve basic perception tasks on surgical images? (2) Can they handle advanced frame-based endoscopic scene understanding tasks? and (3) How do specialized medical VLMs compare to generalist models in this context? Our results reveal that VLMs can effectively perform basic surgical perception tasks, such as object counting and localization, with performance levels comparable to general domain tasks. However, their performance deteriorates significantly when the tasks require medical knowledge. Notably, we find that specialized medical VLMs currently underperform compared to generalist models across both basic and advanced surgical tasks, suggesting that they are not yet optimized for the complexity of surgical environments. These findings highlight the need for further advancements to enable VLMs to handle the unique challenges posed by surgery. Overall, our work provides important insights for the development of next-generation endoscopic AI systems and identifies key areas for improvement in medical visual language models.

cs.CV↗

Confidence intervals uncovered: Are we ready for real-world medical imaging AI?

Medical imaging is spearheading the AI transformation of healthcare. Performance reporting is key to determine which methods should be translated into clinical practice. Frequently, broad conclusions are simply derived from mean performance values. In this paper, we argue that this common practice is often a misleading simplification as it ignores performance variability. Our contribution is threefold. (1) Analyzing all MICCAI segmentation papers (n = 221) published in 2023, we first observe that more than 50% of papers do not assess performance variability at all. Moreover, only one (0.5%) paper reported confidence intervals (CIs) for model performance. (2) To address the reporting bottleneck, we show that the unreported standard deviation (SD) in segmentation papers can be approximated by a second-order polynomial function of the mean Dice similarity coefficient (DSC). Based on external validation data from 56 previous MICCAI challenges, we demonstrate that this approximation can accurately reconstruct the CI of a method using information provided in publications. (3) Finally, we reconstructed 95% CIs around the mean DSC of MICCAI 2023 segmentation papers. The median CI width was 0.03 which is three times larger than the median performance gap between the first and second ranked method. For more than 60% of papers, the mean performance of the second-ranked method was within the CI of the first-ranked method. We conclude that current publications typically do not provide sufficient evidence to support which models could potentially be translated into clinical practice.

cs.CV↗

Understanding metric-related pitfalls in image analysis validation

Validation metrics are key for the reliable tracking of scientific progress and for bridging the current chasm between artificial intelligence (AI) research and its translation into practice. However, increasing evidence shows that particularly in image analysis, metrics are often chosen inadequately in relation to the underlying research problem. This could be attributed to a lack of accessibility of metric-related knowledge: While taking into account the individual strengths, weaknesses, and limitations of validation metrics is a critical prerequisite to making educated choices, the relevant knowledge is currently scattered and poorly accessible to individual researchers. Based on a multi-stage Delphi process conducted by a multidisciplinary expert consortium as well as extensive community feedback, the present work provides the first reliable and comprehensive common point of access to information on pitfalls related to validation metrics in image analysis. Focusing on biomedical image analysis but with the potential of transfer to other fields, the addressed pitfalls generalize across application domains and are categorized according to a newly created, domain-agnostic taxonomy. To facilitate comprehension, illustrations and specific examples accompany each pitfall. As a structured body of information accessible to researchers of all levels of expertise, this work enhances global comprehension of a key topic in image analysis validation.

cs.CV↗

Metrics reloaded: Recommendations for image analysis validation

Increasing evidence shows that flaws in machine learning (ML) algorithm validation are an underestimated global problem. Particularly in automatic biomedical image analysis, chosen performance metrics often do not reflect the domain interest, thus failing to adequately measure scientific progress and hindering translation of ML techniques into practice. To overcome this, our large international expert consortium created Metrics Reloaded, a comprehensive framework guiding researchers in the problem-aware selection of metrics. Following the convergence of ML methodology across application domains, Metrics Reloaded fosters the convergence of validation methodology. The framework was developed in a multi-stage Delphi process and is based on the novel concept of a problem fingerprint - a structured representation of the given problem that captures all aspects that are relevant for metric selection, from the domain interest to the properties of the target structure(s), data set and algorithm output. Based on the problem fingerprint, users are guided through the process of choosing and applying appropriate validation metrics while being made aware of potential pitfalls. Metrics Reloaded targets image analysis problems that can be interpreted as a classification task at image, object or pixel level, namely image-level classification, object detection, semantic segmentation, and instance segmentation tasks. To improve the user experience, we implemented the framework in the Metrics Reloaded online tool, which also provides a point of access to explore weaknesses, strengths and specific recommendations for the most common validation metrics. The broad applicability of our framework across domains is demonstrated by an instantiation for various biological and medical image analysis use cases.

cs.CV↗

Common Limitations of Image Processing Metrics: A Picture Story

While the importance of automatic image analysis is continuously increasing, recent meta-research revealed major flaws with respect to algorithm validation. Performance metrics are particularly key for meaningful, objective, and transparent performance assessment and validation of the used automatic algorithms, but relatively little attention has been given to the practical pitfalls when using specific metrics for a given image analysis task. These are typically related to (1) the disregard of inherent metric properties, such as the behaviour in the presence of class imbalance or small target structures, (2) the disregard of inherent data set properties, such as the non-independence of the test cases, and (3) the disregard of the actual biomedical domain interest that the metrics should reflect. This living dynamically document has the purpose to illustrate important limitations of performance metrics commonly applied in the field of image analysis. In this context, it focuses on biomedical image analysis problems that can be phrased as image-level classification, semantic segmentation, instance segmentation, or object detection task. The current version is based on a Delphi process on metrics conducted by an international consortium of image analysis experts from more than 60 institutions worldwide.

eess.IV↗

Deployment of Image Analysis Algorithms under Prevalence Shifts

Domain gaps are among the most relevant roadblocks in the clinical translation of machine learning (ML)-based solutions for medical image analysis. While current research focuses on new training paradigms and network architectures, little attention is given to the specific effect of prevalence shifts on an algorithm deployed in practice. Such discrepancies between class frequencies in the data used for a method's development/validation and that in its deployment environment(s) are of great importance, for example in the context of artificial intelligence (AI) democratization, as disease prevalences may vary widely across time and location. Our contribution is twofold. First, we empirically demonstrate the potentially severe consequences of missing prevalence handling by analyzing (i) the extent of miscalibration, (ii) the deviation of the decision threshold from the optimum, and (iii) the ability of validation metrics to reflect neural network performance on the deployment population as a function of the discrepancy between development and deployment prevalence. Second, we propose a workflow for prevalence-aware image classification that uses estimated deployment prevalences to adjust a trained classifier to a new environment, without requiring additional annotated deployment data. Comprehensive experiments based on a diverse set of 30 medical classification tasks showcase the benefit of the proposed workflow in generating better classifier decisions and more reliable performance estimates compared to current practice.

cs.CV↗

Discovering new B[e] supergiants and candidate Luminous Blue Variables in nearby galaxies

Mass loss is one of the key parameters that determine stellar evolution. Despite the progress we have achieved over the last decades we still cannot match the observational derived values with theoretical predictions. Even worse, there are certain phases, such as the B[e] supergiants (B[e]SGs) and the Luminous Blue Variables (LBVs), where significant mass is lost through episodic or outburst activity. This leads to various structures around them that permit dust formation, making these objects bright IR sources. The ASSESS project aims to determine the role of episodic mass in the evolution of massive stars, by examining large numbers of cool and hot objects (such as B[e]SGs/LBVs). For this, we initiated a large observing campaign to obtain spectroscopic data for $\sim$1000 IR selected sources in 27 nearby galaxies. Within this project we successfully identified 7 B[e] supergiants (one candidate) and 4 Luminous Blue Variables of which 6 and 2, respectively, are new discoveries. We used spectroscopic, photometric, and light curve information to better constrain the nature of the reported objects. We particularly note the presence of B[e]SGs at metallicity environments as low as 0.14 Z$_{\odot}$.

astro-ph.GA↗

Sources of performance variability in deep learning-based polyp detection

Validation metrics are a key prerequisite for the reliable tracking of scientific progress and for deciding on the potential clinical translation of methods. While recent initiatives aim to develop comprehensive theoretical frameworks for understanding metric-related pitfalls in image analysis problems, there is a lack of experimental evidence on the concrete effects of common and rare pitfalls on specific applications. We address this gap in the literature in the context of colon cancer screening. Our contribution is twofold. Firstly, we present the winning solution of the Endoscopy computer vision challenge (EndoCV) on colon cancer detection, conducted in conjunction with the IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI) 2022. Secondly, we demonstrate the sensitivity of commonly used metrics to a range of hyperparameters as well as the consequences of poor metric choices. Based on comprehensive validation studies performed with patient data from six clinical centers, we found all commonly applied object detection metrics to be subject to high inter-center variability. Furthermore, our results clearly demonstrate that the adaptation of standard hyperparameters used in the computer vision community does not generally lead to the clinically most plausible results. Finally, we present localization criteria that correspond well to clinical relevance. Our work could be a first step towards reconsidering common validation strategies in automatic colon cancer screening applications.

cs.CV↗

Using machine learning to investigate the populations of dusty evolved stars in various metallicities

Mass loss is a key property to understand stellar evolution and in particular for low-metallicity environments. Our knowledge has improved dramatically over the last decades both for single and binary evolutionary models. However, episodic mass loss although definitely present observationally, is not included in the models, while its role is currently undetermined. A major hindrance is the lack of large enough samples of classified stars. We attempted to address this by applying an ensemble machine-learning approach using color indices (from IR/Spitzer and optical/Pan-STARRS photometry) as features and combining the probabilities from three different algorithms. We trained on M31 and M33 sources with known spectral classification, which we grouped into Blue/Yellow/Red/B[e] Supergiants, Luminous Blue Variables, classical Wolf-Rayet and background galaxies/AGNs. We then applied the classifier to about one million Spitzer point sources from 25 nearby galaxies, spanning a range of metallicites ($1/15$ to $\sim3~Z_{\odot}$). Equipped with spectral classifications we investigated the occurrence of these populations with metallicity.

astro-ph.GA↗