Cited by 294AI in cancer detectionDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot LearningRadiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging

Self supervised contrastive learning for digital histopathology

Open access
Ciga, Ozan, Xu, Tony, Martel, Anne Louise·2022·Machine Learning with Applications

Abstract

Unsupervised learning has been a long-standing goal of machine learning and is especially important for medical image analysis, where the learning can compensate for the scarcity of labeled datasets. A promising subclass of unsupervised learning is self-supervised learning, which aims to learn salient features using the raw input as the learning signal. In this work, we tackle the issue of learning domain-specific features without any supervision to improve multiple task performances that are of interest to the digital histopathology community. We apply a contrastive self-supervised learning method to digital histopathology by collecting and pretraining on 57 histopathology datasets without any labels. We find that combining multiple multi-organ datasets with different types of staining and resolution properties improves the quality of the learned features. Furthermore, we find using more images for pretraining leads to a better performance in multiple downstream tasks, albeit there are diminishing returns as more unlabeled images are incorporated into the pretraining. Linear classifiers trained on top of the learned features show that networks pretrained on digital histopathology datasets perform better than ImageNet pretrained networks, boosting task performances by more than 28% in F1 scores on average. Interestingly, we did not observe a consistent correlation between the pretraining dataset site or the organ versus the downstream task (e.g., pretraining with only breast images does not necessarily lead to a superior downstream task performance for breast-related tasks). These findings may also be useful when applying newer contrastive techniques to histopathology data. Pretrained PyTorch models are made publicly available at https://github.com/ozanciga/self-supervised-histopathology.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.mlwa.2021.100198

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Based on contrastive learning and data augmentation, self-supervised learning can learn robust data embeddings from unlabeled data and the trained model can be fitted to many downstream tasks.

    “Based on contrastive learning and data augmentation, the self-supervised learning approach can learn robust data embeddings from unlabeled data and the trained model can be fitted to many downstream tasks [146,147].”
  • Self-supervised learning is an important approach for addressing data scarcity by fully leveraging unlabeled data.

    “Self-supervised learning is an important approach for addressing the challenge by fully leveraging the unlabeled data.”
  • The pathology tasks were focused on histopathological classification, with the majority focused on colorectal cancer classification.

    “The tasks were focused on histopathological classification, where the majority focused on colorectal cancer classification68,84–87.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 10

  1. Bachman, P., Hjelm, R. D., & Buchwalter, W. (2019). Learning representations by maximizing mutual information across views. In Advances in neural information processing systems (pp. 15509-15519).
  2. Campanella, G., Hanna, M. G., Geneslaw, L., Miraflor, A., Werneck Krauss Silva, V., Busam, K. J., et al. (2019b). Clinical-grade computational pathology using weakly supervised deep learning on whole slide images. Nature Medicine, 25(8), 1301-1309. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41591-019-0508-1. · DOI · Paper page
  3. Choyke, P., Turkbey, B., Pinto, P., Merino, M., & Wood, B. (2016). Prostate-MRI dataset. http://dx.doi.org/10.7937/K9/TCIA.2016.6046GUDv. · DOI
  4. Dosovitskiy, A., Springenberg, J. T., Riedmiller, M., & Brox, T. (2014). Discriminative unsupervised feature learning with convolutional neural networks. In Advances in neural information processing systems (pp. 766-774).
  5. Gamper, J., Koohbanani, N. A., Benet, K., Khuram, A., & Rajpoot, N. (2019). Pan- Nuke: an open pan-cancer histology dataset for nuclei instance segmentation and classification. In European congress on digital pathology (pp. 11-19). Springer.
  6. Ronneberger, O., Fischer, P., & Brox, T. (2015). U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation. In International conference on medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention (pp. 234-241). Springer.
  7. Sirinukunwattana, K., Pluim, J. P. W., Chen, H., Qi, X., Heng, P.-A., Guo, Y. B., et al. (2016). Gland segmentation in colon histology images: The glas challenge contest. arXiv:1603.00275. · arXiv
  8. Tarvainen, A., & Valpola, H. (2017). Mean teachers are better role models: Weight- averaged consistency targets improve semi-supervised deep learning results. In Advances in neural information processing systems (pp. 1195-1204).
  9. Tellez, D., Litjens, G., van der Laak, J., & Ciompi, F. (2019). Neural image compression for gigapixel histopathology image analysis. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.
  10. You, Y., Gitman, I., & Ginsburg, B. (2017). Large batch training of convolutional networks. Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, ArXiv.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ciga, O., Xu, T., & Martel, A. L.
Affiliations
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • University of British Columbia (CA)
Corresponding author
Ciga, Ozan
Venue
Machine Learning with Applications
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-03
Volume
7
Pages
100198
ISSN
2666-8270 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3108181344
Cited by
294
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 31 · 2025: 58 · 2024: 85 · 2023: 72 · 2022: 38 · 2021: 10
FWCI
18.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Machine Learning with Applications (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • Compute Canada
  • Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
  • Canadian Cancer Society (705772)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in cancer detection
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
Keywords
self-supervised learning, contrastive learning, digital histopathology, unsupervised feature learning, transfer learning, breast histopathology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review