Isensee, Fabian
Bridging vision language model (VLM) evaluation gaps with a framework for scalable and cost-effective benchmark generation
Rädsch, Tim, Mayer, Leon, Pavicic, Simon, Kavur, A. Emre, Knopp, Marcel, Öztürk, Barış, Maier-Hein, Klaus, Jaeger, Paul F., Isensee, Fabian, Reinke, Annika, Maier-Hein, Lena
Reliable evaluation of AI models is critical for scientific progress and practical application. While existing VLM benchmarks provide general insights into model capabilities, their heterogeneous designs and limited focus on a few imaging domains pose significant challenges for both cross-domain performance comparison and targeted domain-specific evaluation. To address this, we propose three key contributions: (1) a framework for the resource-efficient creation of domain-specific VLM benchmarks enabled by task augmentation for creating multiple diverse tasks from a single existing task, (2) the release of new VLM benchmarks for seven domains, created according to the same homogeneous protocol and including 162,946 thoroughly human-validated answers, and (3) an extensive benchmarking of 22 state-of-the-art VLMs on a total of 37,171 tasks, revealing performance variances across domains and tasks, thereby supporting the need for tailored VLM benchmarks. Adoption of our methodology will pave the way for the resource-efficient domain-specific selection of models and guide future research efforts toward addressing core open questions.
Multi-Class Segmentation of Aortic Branches and Zones in Computed Tomography Angiography: The AortaSeg24 Challenge
Imran, Muhammad, Krebs, Jonathan R., Sivaraman, Vishal Balaji, Zhang, Teng, Kumar, Amarjeet, Ueland, Walker R., Fassler, Michael J., Huang, Jinlong, Sun, Xiao, Wang, Lisheng, Shi, Pengcheng, Rokuss, Maximilian, Baumgartner, Michael, Kirchhof, Yannick, Maier-Hein, Klaus H., Isensee, Fabian, Liu, Shuolin, Han, Bing, Nguyen, Bong Thanh, Shin, Dong-jin, Ji-Woo, Park, Choi, Mathew, Uhm, Kwang-Hyun, Ko, Sung-Jea, Lee, Chanwoong, Chun, Jaehee, Kim, Jin Sung, Zhang, Minghui, Zhang, Hanxiao, You, Xin, Gu, Yun, Pan, Zhaohong, Liu, Xuan, Liang, Xiaokun, Tiefenthaler, Markus, Almar-Munoz, Enrique, Schwab, Matthias, Kotyushev, Mikhail, Epifanov, Rostislav, Wodzinski, Marek, Muller, Henning, Qayyum, Abdul, Mazher, Moona, Niederer, Steven A., Wang, Zhiwei, Yang, Kaixiang, Ren, Jintao, Korreman, Stine Sofia, Gao, Yuchong, Zeng, Hongye, Zheng, Haoyu, Zheng, Rui, Yue, Jinghua, Zhou, Fugen, Liu, Bo, Cosman, Alexander, Liang, Muxuan, Zhao, Chang, Upchurch, Gilbert R. Jr., Ma, Jun, Zhou, Yuyin, Cooper, Michol A., Shao, Wei
Multi-class segmentation of the aorta in computed tomography angiography (CTA) scans is essential for diagnosing and planning complex endovascular treatments for patients with aortic dissections. However, existing methods reduce aortic segmentation to a binary problem, limiting their ability to measure diameters across different branches and zones. Furthermore, no open-source dataset is currently available to support the development of multi-class aortic segmentation methods. To address this gap, we organized the AortaSeg24 MICCAI Challenge, introducing the first dataset of 100 CTA volumes annotated for 23 clinically relevant aortic branches and zones. This dataset was designed to facilitate both model development and validation. The challenge attracted 121 teams worldwide, with participants leveraging state-of-the-art frameworks such as nnU-Net and exploring novel techniques, including cascaded models, data augmentation strategies, and custom loss functions. We evaluated the submitted algorithms using the Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC) and Normalized Surface Distance (NSD), highlighting the approaches adopted by the top five performing teams. This paper presents the challenge design, dataset details, evaluation metrics, and an in-depth analysis of the top-performing algorithms. The annotated dataset, evaluation code, and implementations of the leading methods are publicly available to support further research. All resources can be accessed at https://aortaseg24.grand-challenge.org.
Code and Pixels: Multi-Modal Contrastive Pre-training for Enhanced Tabular Data Analysis
Roy, Kankana, Krämer, Lars, Domaschke, Sebastian, Haris, Malik, Aydin, Roland, Isensee, Fabian, Held, Martin
Learning from tabular data is of paramount importance, as it complements the conventional analysis of image and video data by providing a rich source of structured information that is often critical for comprehensive understanding and decision-making processes. We present Multi-task Contrastive Masked Tabular Modeling (MT-CMTM), a novel method aiming to enhance tabular models by leveraging the correlation between tabular data and corresponding images. MT-CMTM employs a dual strategy combining contrastive learning with masked tabular modeling, optimizing the synergy between these data modalities. Central to our approach is a 1D Convolutional Neural Network with residual connections and an attention mechanism (1D-ResNet-CBAM), designed to efficiently process tabular data without relying on images. This enables MT-CMTM to handle purely tabular data for downstream tasks, eliminating the need for potentially costly image acquisition and processing. We evaluated MT-CMTM on the DVM car dataset, which is uniquely suited for this particular scenario, and the newly developed HIPMP dataset, which connects membrane fabrication parameters with image data. Our MT-CMTM model outperforms the proposed tabular 1D-ResNet-CBAM, which is trained from scratch, achieving a relative 1.48% improvement in relative MSE on HIPMP and a 2.38% increase in absolute accuracy on DVM. These results demonstrate MT-CMTM's robustness and its potential to advance the field of multi-modal learning.
Touchstone Benchmark: Are We on the Right Way for Evaluating AI Algorithms for Medical Segmentation?
Bassi, Pedro R. A. S., Li, Wenxuan, Tang, Yucheng, Isensee, Fabian, Wang, Zifu, Chen, Jieneng, Chou, Yu-Cheng, Kirchhoff, Yannick, Rokuss, Maximilian, Huang, Ziyan, Ye, Jin, He, Junjun, Wald, Tassilo, Ulrich, Constantin, Baumgartner, Michael, Roy, Saikat, Maier-Hein, Klaus H., Jaeger, Paul, Ye, Yiwen, Xie, Yutong, Zhang, Jianpeng, Chen, Ziyang, Xia, Yong, Xing, Zhaohu, Zhu, Lei, Sadegheih, Yousef, Bozorgpour, Afshin, Kumari, Pratibha, Azad, Reza, Merhof, Dorit, Shi, Pengcheng, Ma, Ting, Du, Yuxin, Bai, Fan, Huang, Tiejun, Zhao, Bo, Wang, Haonan, Li, Xiaomeng, Gu, Hanxue, Dong, Haoyu, Yang, Jichen, Mazurowski, Maciej A., Gupta, Saumya, Wu, Linshan, Zhuang, Jiaxin, Chen, Hao, Roth, Holger, Xu, Daguang, Blaschko, Matthew B., Decherchi, Sergio, Cavalli, Andrea, Yuille, Alan L., Zhou, Zongwei
How can we test AI performance? This question seems trivial, but it isn't. Standard benchmarks often have problems such as in-distribution and small-size test sets, oversimplified metrics, unfair comparisons, and short-term outcome pressure. As a consequence, good performance on standard benchmarks does not guarantee success in real-world scenarios. To address these problems, we present Touchstone, a large-scale collaborative segmentation benchmark of 9 types of abdominal organs. This benchmark is based on 5,195 training CT scans from 76 hospitals around the world and 5,903 testing CT scans from 11 additional hospitals. This diverse test set enhances the statistical significance of benchmark results and rigorously evaluates AI algorithms across various out-of-distribution scenarios. We invited 14 inventors of 19 AI algorithms to train their algorithms, while our team, as a third party, independently evaluated these algorithms on three test sets. In addition, we also evaluated pre-existing AI frameworks--which, differing from algorithms, are more flexible and can support different algorithms--including MONAI from NVIDIA, nnU-Net from DKFZ, and numerous other open-source frameworks. We are committed to expanding this benchmark to encourage more innovation of AI algorithms for the medical domain.
Decoupling Semantic Similarity from Spatial Alignment for Neural Networks
Wald, Tassilo, Ulrich, Constantin, Köhler, Gregor, Zimmerer, David, Denner, Stefan, Baumgartner, Michael, Isensee, Fabian, Jaini, Priyank, Maier-Hein, Klaus H.
What representation do deep neural networks learn? How similar are images to each other for neural networks? Despite the overwhelming success of deep learning methods key questions about their internal workings still remain largely unanswered, due to their internal high dimensionality and complexity. To address this, one approach is to measure the similarity of activation responses to various inputs. Representational Similarity Matrices (RSMs) distill this similarity into scalar values for each input pair. These matrices encapsulate the entire similarity structure of a system, indicating which input leads to similar responses. While the similarity between images is ambiguous, we argue that the spatial location of semantic objects does neither influence human perception nor deep learning classifiers. Thus this should be reflected in the definition of similarity between image responses for computer vision systems. Revisiting the established similarity calculations for RSMs we expose their sensitivity to spatial alignment. In this paper, we propose to solve this through semantic RSMs, which are invariant to spatial permutation. We measure semantic similarity between input responses by formulating it as a set-matching problem. Further, we quantify the superiority of semantic RSMs over spatio-semantic RSMs through image retrieval and by comparing the similarity between representations to the similarity between predicted class probabilities.
Longitudinal Segmentation of MS Lesions via Temporal Difference Weighting
Rokuss, Maximilian, Kirchhoff, Yannick, Roy, Saikat, Kovacs, Balint, Ulrich, Constantin, Wald, Tassilo, Zenk, Maximilian, Denner, Stefan, Isensee, Fabian, Vollmuth, Philipp, Kleesiek, Jens, Maier-Hein, Klaus
Accurate segmentation of Multiple Sclerosis (MS) lesions in longitudinal MRI scans is crucial for monitoring disease progression and treatment efficacy. Although changes across time are taken into account when assessing images in clinical practice, most existing deep learning methods treat scans from different timepoints separately. Among studies utilizing longitudinal images, a simple channel-wise concatenation is the primary albeit suboptimal method employed to integrate timepoints. We introduce a novel approach that explicitly incorporates temporal differences between baseline and follow-up scans through a unique architectural inductive bias called Difference Weighting Block. It merges features from two timepoints, emphasizing changes between scans. We achieve superior scores in lesion segmentation (Dice Score, Hausdorff distance) as well as lesion detection (lesion-level $F_1$ score) as compared to state-of-the-art longitudinal and single timepoint models across two datasets. Our code is made publicly available at www.github.com/MIC-DKFZ/Longitudinal-Difference-Weighting.
Skeleton Recall Loss for Connectivity Conserving and Resource Efficient Segmentation of Thin Tubular Structures
Kirchhoff, Yannick, Rokuss, Maximilian R., Roy, Saikat, Kovacs, Balint, Ulrich, Constantin, Wald, Tassilo, Zenk, Maximilian, Vollmuth, Philipp, Kleesiek, Jens, Isensee, Fabian, Maier-Hein, Klaus
Accurately segmenting thin tubular structures, such as vessels, nerves, roads or concrete cracks, is a crucial task in computer vision. Standard deep learning-based segmentation loss functions, such as Dice or Cross-Entropy, focus on volumetric overlap, often at the expense of preserving structural connectivity or topology. This can lead to segmentation errors that adversely affect downstream tasks, including flow calculation, navigation, and structural inspection. Although current topology-focused losses mark an improvement, they introduce significant computational and memory overheads. This is particularly relevant for 3D data, rendering these losses infeasible for larger volumes as well as increasingly important multi-class segmentation problems. To mitigate this, we propose a novel Skeleton Recall Loss, which effectively addresses these challenges by circumventing intensive GPU-based calculations with inexpensive CPU operations. It demonstrates overall superior performance to current state-of-the-art approaches on five public datasets for topology-preserving segmentation, while substantially reducing computational overheads by more than 90%. In doing so, we introduce the first multi-class capable loss function for thin structure segmentation, excelling in both efficiency and efficacy for topology-preservation.
TopCoW: Benchmarking Topology-Aware Anatomical Segmentation of the Circle of Willis (CoW) for CTA and MRA
Yang, Kaiyuan, Musio, Fabio, Ma, Yihui, Juchler, Norman, Paetzold, Johannes C., Al-Maskari, Rami, Höher, Luciano, Li, Hongwei Bran, Hamamci, Ibrahim Ethem, Sekuboyina, Anjany, Shit, Suprosanna, Huang, Houjing, Waldmannstetter, Diana, Kofler, Florian, Navarro, Fernando, Menten, Martin, Ezhov, Ivan, Rueckert, Daniel, Vos, Iris, Ruigrok, Ynte, Velthuis, Birgitta, Kuijf, Hugo, Hämmerli, Julien, Wurster, Catherine, Bijlenga, Philippe, Westphal, Laura, Bisschop, Jeroen, Colombo, Elisa, Baazaoui, Hakim, Makmur, Andrew, Hallinan, James, Wiestler, Bene, Kirschke, Jan S., Wiest, Roland, Montagnon, Emmanuel, Letourneau-Guillon, Laurent, Galdran, Adrian, Galati, Francesco, Falcetta, Daniele, Zuluaga, Maria A., Lin, Chaolong, Zhao, Haoran, Zhang, Zehan, Ra, Sinyoung, Hwang, Jongyun, Park, Hyunjin, Chen, Junqiang, Wodzinski, Marek, Müller, Henning, Shi, Pengcheng, Liu, Wei, Ma, Ting, Yalçin, Cansu, Hamadache, Rachika E., Salvi, Joaquim, Llado, Xavier, Estrada, Uma Maria Lal-Trehan, Abramova, Valeriia, Giancardo, Luca, Oliver, Arnau, Liu, Jialu, Huang, Haibin, Cui, Yue, Lin, Zehang, Liu, Yusheng, Zhu, Shunzhi, Patel, Tatsat R., Tutino, Vincent M., Orouskhani, Maysam, Wang, Huayu, Mossa-Basha, Mahmud, Zhu, Chengcheng, Rokuss, Maximilian R., Kirchhoff, Yannick, Disch, Nico, Holzschuh, Julius, Isensee, Fabian, Maier-Hein, Klaus, Sato, Yuki, Hirsch, Sven, Wegener, Susanne, Menze, Bjoern
The Circle of Willis (CoW) is an important network of arteries connecting major circulations of the brain. Its vascular architecture is believed to affect the risk, severity, and clinical outcome of serious neuro-vascular diseases. However, characterizing the highly variable CoW anatomy is still a manual and time-consuming expert task. The CoW is usually imaged by two angiographic imaging modalities, magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) and computed tomography angiography (CTA), but there exist limited public datasets with annotations on CoW anatomy, especially for CTA. Therefore we organized the TopCoW Challenge in 2023 with the release of an annotated CoW dataset. The TopCoW dataset was the first public dataset with voxel-level annotations for thirteen possible CoW vessel components, enabled by virtual-reality (VR) technology. It was also the first large dataset with paired MRA and CTA from the same patients. TopCoW challenge formalized the CoW characterization problem as a multiclass anatomical segmentation task with an emphasis on topological metrics. We invited submissions worldwide for the CoW segmentation task, which attracted over 140 registered participants from four continents. The top performing teams managed to segment many CoW components to Dice scores around 90%, but with lower scores for communicating arteries and rare variants. There were also topological mistakes for predictions with high Dice scores. Additional topological analysis revealed further areas for improvement in detecting certain CoW components and matching CoW variant topology accurately. TopCoW represented a first attempt at benchmarking the CoW anatomical segmentation task for MRA and CTA, both morphologically and topologically.
Panoptica -- instance-wise evaluation of 3D semantic and instance segmentation maps
Kofler, Florian, Möller, Hendrik, Buchner, Josef A., de la Rosa, Ezequiel, Ezhov, Ivan, Rosier, Marcel, Mekki, Isra, Shit, Suprosanna, Negwer, Moritz, Al-Maskari, Rami, Ertürk, Ali, Vinayahalingam, Shankeeth, Isensee, Fabian, Pati, Sarthak, Rueckert, Daniel, Kirschke, Jan S., Ehrlich, Stefan K., Reinke, Annika, Menze, Bjoern, Wiestler, Benedikt, Piraud, Marie
This paper introduces panoptica, a versatile and performance-optimized package designed for computing instance-wise segmentation quality metrics from 2D and 3D segmentation maps. panoptica addresses the limitations of existing metrics and provides a modular framework that complements the original intersection over union-based panoptic quality with other metrics, such as the distance metric Average Symmetric Surface Distance. The package is open-source, implemented in Python, and accompanied by comprehensive documentation and tutorials. panoptica employs a three-step metrics computation process to cover diverse use cases. The efficacy of panoptica is demonstrated on various real-world biomedical datasets, where an instance-wise evaluation is instrumental for an accurate representation of the underlying clinical task. Overall, we envision panoptica as a valuable tool facilitating in-depth evaluation of segmentation methods.
Biomedical image analysis competitions: The state of current participation practice
Eisenmann, Matthias, Reinke, Annika, Weru, Vivienn, Tizabi, Minu Dietlinde, Isensee, Fabian, Adler, Tim J., Godau, Patrick, Cheplygina, Veronika, Kozubek, Michal, Ali, Sharib, Gupta, Anubha, Kybic, Jan, Noble, Alison, de Solórzano, Carlos Ortiz, Pachade, Samiksha, Petitjean, Caroline, Sage, Daniel, Wei, Donglai, Wilden, Elizabeth, Alapatt, Deepak, Andrearczyk, Vincent, Baid, Ujjwal, Bakas, Spyridon, Balu, Niranjan, Bano, Sophia, Bawa, Vivek Singh, Bernal, Jorge, Bodenstedt, Sebastian, Casella, Alessandro, Choi, Jinwook, Commowick, Olivier, Daum, Marie, Depeursinge, Adrien, Dorent, Reuben, Egger, Jan, Eichhorn, Hannah, Engelhardt, Sandy, Ganz, Melanie, Girard, Gabriel, Hansen, Lasse, Heinrich, Mattias, Heller, Nicholas, Hering, Alessa, Huaulmé, Arnaud, Kim, Hyunjeong, Landman, Bennett, Li, Hongwei Bran, Li, Jianning, Ma, Jun, Martel, Anne, Martín-Isla, Carlos, Menze, Bjoern, Nwoye, Chinedu Innocent, Oreiller, Valentin, Padoy, Nicolas, Pati, Sarthak, Payette, Kelly, Sudre, Carole, van Wijnen, Kimberlin, Vardazaryan, Armine, Vercauteren, Tom, Wagner, Martin, Wang, Chuanbo, Yap, Moi Hoon, Yu, Zeyun, Yuan, Chun, Zenk, Maximilian, Zia, Aneeq, Zimmerer, David, Bao, Rina, Choi, Chanyeol, Cohen, Andrew, Dzyubachyk, Oleh, Galdran, Adrian, Gan, Tianyuan, Guo, Tianqi, Gupta, Pradyumna, Haithami, Mahmood, Ho, Edward, Jang, Ikbeom, Li, Zhili, Luo, Zhengbo, Lux, Filip, Makrogiannis, Sokratis, Müller, Dominik, Oh, Young-tack, Pang, Subeen, Pape, Constantin, Polat, Gorkem, Reed, Charlotte Rosalie, Ryu, Kanghyun, Scherr, Tim, Thambawita, Vajira, Wang, Haoyu, Wang, Xinliang, Xu, Kele, Yeh, Hung, Yeo, Doyeob, Yuan, Yixuan, Zeng, Yan, Zhao, Xin, Abbing, Julian, Adam, Jannes, Adluru, Nagesh, Agethen, Niklas, Ahmed, Salman, Khalil, Yasmina Al, Alenyà, Mireia, Alhoniemi, Esa, An, Chengyang, Anwar, Talha, Arega, Tewodros Weldebirhan, Avisdris, Netanell, Aydogan, Dogu Baran, Bai, Yingbin, Calisto, Maria Baldeon, Basaran, Berke Doga, Beetz, Marcel, Bian, Cheng, Bian, Hao, Blansit, Kevin, Bloch, Louise, Bohnsack, Robert, Bosticardo, Sara, Breen, Jack, Brudfors, Mikael, Brüngel, Raphael, Cabezas, Mariano, Cacciola, Alberto, Chen, Zhiwei, Chen, Yucong, Chen, Daniel Tianming, Cho, Minjeong, Choi, Min-Kook, Xie, Chuantao Xie Chuantao, Cobzas, Dana, Cohen-Adad, Julien, Acero, Jorge Corral, Das, Sujit Kumar, de Oliveira, Marcela, Deng, Hanqiu, Dong, Guiming, Doorenbos, Lars, Efird, Cory, Escalera, Sergio, Fan, Di, Serj, Mehdi Fatan, Fenneteau, Alexandre, Fidon, Lucas, Filipiak, Patryk, Finzel, René, Freitas, Nuno R., Friedrich, Christoph M., Fulton, Mitchell, Gaida, Finn, Galati, Francesco, Galazis, Christoforos, Gan, Chang Hee, Gao, Zheyao, Gao, Shengbo, Gazda, Matej, Gerats, Beerend, Getty, Neil, Gibicar, Adam, Gifford, Ryan, Gohil, Sajan, Grammatikopoulou, Maria, Grzech, Daniel, Güley, Orhun, Günnemann, Timo, Guo, Chunxu, Guy, Sylvain, Ha, Heonjin, Han, Luyi, Han, Il Song, Hatamizadeh, Ali, He, Tian, Heo, Jimin, Hitziger, Sebastian, Hong, SeulGi, Hong, SeungBum, Huang, Rian, Huang, Ziyan, Huellebrand, Markus, Huschauer, Stephan, Hussain, Mustaffa, Inubushi, Tomoo, Polat, Ece Isik, Jafaritadi, Mojtaba, Jeong, SeongHun, Jian, Bailiang, Jiang, Yuanhong, Jiang, Zhifan, Jin, Yueming, Joshi, Smriti, Kadkhodamohammadi, Abdolrahim, Kamraoui, Reda Abdellah, Kang, Inha, Kang, Junghwa, Karimi, Davood, Khademi, April, Khan, Muhammad Irfan, Khan, Suleiman A., Khantwal, Rishab, Kim, Kwang-Ju, Kline, Timothy, Kondo, Satoshi, Kontio, Elina, Krenzer, Adrian, Kroviakov, Artem, Kuijf, Hugo, Kumar, Satyadwyoom, La Rosa, Francesco, Lad, Abhi, Lee, Doohee, Lee, Minho, Lena, Chiara, Li, Hao, Li, Ling, Li, Xingyu, Liao, Fuyuan, Liao, KuanLun, Oliveira, Arlindo Limede, Lin, Chaonan, Lin, Shan, Linardos, Akis, Linguraru, Marius George, Liu, Han, Liu, Tao, Liu, Di, Liu, Yanling, Lourenço-Silva, João, Lu, Jingpei, Lu, Jiangshan, Luengo, Imanol, Lund, Christina B., Luu, Huan Minh, Lv, Yi, Lv, Yi, Macar, Uzay, Maechler, Leon, L., Sina Mansour, Marshall, Kenji, Mazher, Moona, McKinley, Richard, Medela, Alfonso, Meissen, Felix, Meng, Mingyuan, Miller, Dylan, Mirjahanmardi, Seyed Hossein, Mishra, Arnab, Mitha, Samir, Mohy-ud-Din, Hassan, Mok, Tony Chi Wing, Murugesan, Gowtham Krishnan, Karthik, Enamundram Naga, Nalawade, Sahil, Nalepa, Jakub, Naser, Mohamed, Nateghi, Ramin, Naveed, Hammad, Nguyen, Quang-Minh, Quoc, Cuong Nguyen, Nichyporuk, Brennan, Oliveira, Bruno, Owen, David, Pal, Jimut Bahan, Pan, Junwen, Pan, Wentao, Pang, Winnie, Park, Bogyu, Pawar, Vivek, Pawar, Kamlesh, Peven, Michael, Philipp, Lena, Pieciak, Tomasz, Plotka, Szymon, Plutat, Marcel, Pourakpour, Fattaneh, Preložnik, Domen, Punithakumar, Kumaradevan, Qayyum, Abdul, Queirós, Sandro, Rahmim, Arman, Razavi, Salar, Ren, Jintao, Rezaei, Mina, Rico, Jonathan Adam, Rieu, ZunHyan, Rink, Markus, Roth, Johannes, Ruiz-Gonzalez, Yusely, Saeed, Numan, Saha, Anindo, Salem, Mostafa, Sanchez-Matilla, Ricardo, Schilling, Kurt, Shao, Wei, Shen, Zhiqiang, Shi, Ruize, Shi, Pengcheng, Sobotka, Daniel, Soulier, Théodore, Fadida, Bella Specktor, Stoyanov, Danail, Mun, Timothy Sum Hon, Sun, Xiaowu, Tao, Rong, Thaler, Franz, Théberge, Antoine, Thielke, Felix, Torres, Helena, Wahid, Kareem A., Wang, Jiacheng, Wang, YiFei, Wang, Wei, Wang, Xiong, Wen, Jianhui, Wen, Ning, Wodzinski, Marek, Wu, Ye, Xia, Fangfang, Xiang, Tianqi, Xiaofei, Chen, Xu, Lizhan, Xue, Tingting, Yang, Yuxuan, Yang, Lin, Yao, Kai, Yao, Huifeng, Yazdani, Amirsaeed, Yip, Michael, Yoo, Hwanseung, Yousefirizi, Fereshteh, Yu, Shunkai, Yu, Lei, Zamora, Jonathan, Zeineldin, Ramy Ashraf, Zeng, Dewen, Zhang, Jianpeng, Zhang, Bokai, Zhang, Jiapeng, Zhang, Fan, Zhang, Huahong, Zhao, Zhongchen, Zhao, Zixuan, Zhao, Jiachen, Zhao, Can, Zheng, Qingshuo, Zhi, Yuheng, Zhou, Ziqi, Zou, Baosheng, Maier-Hein, Klaus, Jäger, Paul F., Kopp-Schneider, Annette, Maier-Hein, Lena
The number of international benchmarking competitions is steadily increasing in various fields of machine learning (ML) research and practice. So far, however, little is known about the common practice as well as bottlenecks faced by the community in tackling the research questions posed. To shed light on the status quo of algorithm development in the specific field of biomedical imaging analysis, we designed an international survey that was issued to all participants of challenges conducted in conjunction with the IEEE ISBI 2021 and MICCAI 2021 conferences (80 competitions in total). The survey covered participants' expertise and working environments, their chosen strategies, as well as algorithm characteristics. A median of 72% challenge participants took part in the survey. According to our results, knowledge exchange was the primary incentive (70%) for participation, while the reception of prize money played only a minor role (16%). While a median of 80 working hours was spent on method development, a large portion of participants stated that they did not have enough time for method development (32%). 25% perceived the infrastructure to be a bottleneck. Overall, 94% of all solutions were deep learning-based. Of these, 84% were based on standard architectures. 43% of the respondents reported that the data samples (e.g., images) were too large to be processed at once. This was most commonly addressed by patch-based training (69%), downsampling (37%), and solving 3D analysis tasks as a series of 2D tasks. K-fold cross-validation on the training set was performed by only 37% of the participants and only 50% of the participants performed ensembling based on multiple identical models (61%) or heterogeneous models (39%). 48% of the respondents applied postprocessing steps.