Crowd disagreement about medical images is informative

June 21, 2018 ยท Declared Dead ยท ๐Ÿ› CVII-STENT/LABELS@MICCAI

๐Ÿ‘ป CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Veronika Cheplygina, Josien P. W. Pluim arXiv ID 1806.08174 Category cs.CV: Computer Vision Citations 26 Venue CVII-STENT/LABELS@MICCAI Last Checked 3 months ago
Abstract
Classifiers for medical image analysis are often trained with a single consensus label, based on combining labels given by experts or crowds. However, disagreement between annotators may be informative, and thus removing it may not be the best strategy. As a proof of concept, we predict whether a skin lesion from the ISIC 2017 dataset is a melanoma or not, based on crowd annotations of visual characteristics of that lesion. We compare using the mean annotations, illustrating consensus, to standard deviations and other distribution moments, illustrating disagreement. We show that the mean annotations perform best, but that the disagreement measures are still informative. We also make the crowd annotations used in this paper available at \url{https://figshare.com/s/5cbbce14647b66286544}.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

๐Ÿ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt โ€” Computer Vision

Died the same way โ€” ๐Ÿ‘ป Ghosted