arXiv subjects

Janice Newsome

Publications and source records attributed to Janice Newsome.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

RadHarmony: Radiological Data Handling in the Era of Agentic AI

Training deep learning models on radiological images requires integrating heterogeneous datasets across different sources, file formats, directory layouts, label schemas, and annotation types. We present RadHarmony, an open-source Python library that provides a unified API for loading, harmonizing, and augmenting radiological datasets, with a primary focus on chest radiographs and early support for computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). RadHarmony standardizes metadata from 24 public datasets into a single tabular format, wraps MONAI's map-style datasets for deep-learning-ready sample delivery with optional on-disk caching, and supports classification labels, segmentation masks, bounding boxes, and radiology report text through a single interface, with an interactive visualization tool for dataset exploration and verification. To lower the barrier for integrating new datasets, RadHarmony introduces an AI-agent skill that guides the full integration workflow from raw data inspection through code generation and testing. We demonstrate the library's utility by pretraining RadHarmony-ViT, a reference vision transformer baseline that combines three heterogeneous chest radiograph datasets with no dataset-specific code. The code and pretrained model weights are available at https://github.com/f10409/RadHarmony.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

MultiMedVision: Multi-Modal Medical Vision Framework

Multi-modal medical imaging enables comprehensive diagnostics, yet current foundation models process 2D (e.g. X-ray) and 3D (e.g. CT) data with separate, dimensionality-specific architectures. We present MultiMedVision, a unified framework for joint 2D/3D representation learning built on a Sparse Vision Transformer. Our model uses 3D Rotary Positional Embeddings and variable-length sequence packing to process mixed-modality batches natively within a shared latent space, without modality-specific adapters or treating 3D volumes as 2D slice sequences. Trained with a self-supervised objective on chest X-rays (MIMIC-CXR) and CT scans (CT-RATE), and using a single shared encoder with 5x less data, MultiMedVision achieves competitive performance on both 2D benchmarks (Macro AUROC 0.82 on MIMIC, 0.84 on CheXpert) and 3D tasks (0.85 on CT-RATE). Analysis of the learned representations reveals coexisting modality-specific and shared feature subspaces, demonstrating that unified cross-dimensional representation learning is feasible without sacrificing modality-specific performance.

cs.CV↗

arXiv2025

Feature Quality and Adaptability of Medical Foundation Models: A Comparative Evaluation for Radiographic Classification and Segmentation

Foundation models (FMs) promise to generalize medical imaging, but their effectiveness varies. It remains unclear how pre-training domain (medical vs. general), paradigm (e.g., text-guided), and architecture influence embedding quality, hindering the selection of optimal encoders for specific radiology tasks. To address this, we evaluate vision encoders from eight medical and general-domain FMs for chest X-ray analysis. We benchmark classification (pneumothorax, cardiomegaly) and segmentation (pneumothorax, cardiac boundary) using linear probing and fine-tuning. Our results show that domain-specific pre-training provides a significant advantage; medical FMs consistently outperformed general-domain models in linear probing, establishing superior initial feature quality. However, feature utility is highly task-dependent. Pre-trained embeddings were strong for global classification and segmenting salient anatomy (e.g., heart). In contrast, for segmenting complex, subtle pathologies (e.g., pneumothorax), all FMs performed poorly without significant fine-tuning, revealing a critical gap in localizing subtle disease. Subgroup analysis showed FMs use confounding shortcuts (e.g., chest tubes for pneumothorax) for classification, a strategy that fails for precise segmentation. We also found that expensive text-image alignment is not a prerequisite; image-only (RAD-DINO) and label-supervised (Ark+) FMs were among top performers. Notably, a supervised, end-to-end baseline remained highly competitive, matching or exceeding the best FMs on segmentation tasks. These findings show that while medical pre-training is beneficial, architectural choices (e.g., multi-scale) are critical, and pre-trained features are not universally effective, especially for complex localization tasks where supervised models remain a strong alternative.

cs.CV↗

arXiv2025

Impact of Label Noise from Large Language Models Generated Annotations on Evaluation of Diagnostic Model Performance

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to generate labels from radiology reports to enable large-scale AI evaluation. However, label noise from LLMs can introduce bias into performance estimates, especially under varying disease prevalence and model quality. This study quantifies how LLM labeling errors impact downstream diagnostic model evaluation. We developed a simulation framework to assess how LLM label errors affect observed model performance. A synthetic dataset of 10,000 cases was generated across different prevalence levels. LLM sensitivity and specificity were varied independently between 90% and 100%. We simulated diagnostic models with true sensitivity and specificity ranging from 90% to 100%. Observed performance was computed using LLM-generated labels as the reference. We derived analytical performance bounds and ran 5,000 Monte Carlo trials per condition to estimate empirical uncertainty. Observed performance was highly sensitive to LLM label quality, with bias strongly influenced by disease prevalence. In low-prevalence settings, small reductions in LLM specificity led to substantial underestimation of sensitivity. For example, at 10% prevalence, an LLM with 95% specificity yielded an observed sensitivity of ~53% despite a perfect model. In high-prevalence scenarios, reduced LLM sensitivity caused underestimation of model specificity. Monte Carlo simulations consistently revealed downward bias, with observed performance often falling below true values even when within theoretical bounds. LLM-generated labels can introduce systematic, prevalence-dependent bias into model evaluation. Specificity is more critical in low-prevalence tasks, while sensitivity dominates in high-prevalence settings. These findings highlight the importance of prevalence-aware prompt design and error characterization when using LLMs for post-deployment model assessment in clinical AI.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2025

Evaluating Vision Language Models (VLMs) for Radiology: A Comprehensive Analysis

Foundation models, trained on vast amounts of data using self-supervised techniques, have emerged as a promising frontier for advancing artificial intelligence (AI) applications in medicine. This study evaluates three different vision-language foundation models (RAD-DINO, CheXagent, and BiomedCLIP) on their ability to capture fine-grained imaging features for radiology tasks. The models were assessed across classification, segmentation, and regression tasks for pneumothorax and cardiomegaly on chest radiographs. Self-supervised RAD-DINO consistently excelled in segmentation tasks, while text-supervised CheXagent demonstrated superior classification performance. BiomedCLIP showed inconsistent performance across tasks. A custom segmentation model that integrates global and local features substantially improved performance for all foundation models, particularly for challenging pneumothorax segmentation. The findings highlight that pre-training methodology significantly influences model performance on specific downstream tasks. For fine-grained segmentation tasks, models trained without text supervision performed better, while text-supervised models offered advantages in classification and interpretability. These insights provide guidance for selecting foundation models based on specific clinical applications in radiology.

cs.CV↗