Hibou: A Family of Foundational Vision Transformers for Pathology
Open accessAbstract
Pathology, the microscopic examination of diseased tissue, is critical for diagnosing various medical conditions, particularly cancers. Traditional methods are labor-intensive and prone to human error. Digital pathology, which converts glass slides into high-resolution digital images for analysis by computer algorithms, revolutionizes the field by enhancing diagnostic accuracy, consistency, and efficiency through automated image analysis and large-scale data processing. Foundational transformer pretraining is crucial for developing robust, generalizable models as it enables learning from vast amounts of unannotated data. This paper introduces the Hibou family of foundational vision transformers for pathology, leveraging the DINOv2 framework to pretrain two model variants, Hibou-B and Hibou-L, on a proprietary dataset of over 1 million whole slide images (WSIs) representing diverse tissue types and staining techniques. Our pretrained models demonstrate superior performance on both patch-level and slide-level benchmarks, surpassing existing state-of-the-art methods. Notably, Hibou-L achieves the highest average accuracy across multiple benchmark datasets. To support further research and application in the field, we have open-sourced the Hibou models, which can be accessed at https://github.com/HistAI/hibou.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
Combining additional data and a heavier architecture can potentially improve performance, as demonstrated with patch encoders.
“Combining the additional data and a heavier architecture can potentially improve the performance, as demonstrated with patch encoders12,13,126.”
From A multimodal whole-slide foundation model for pathology (2025) · cites this paper as [126]
Mass-340K contains fewer slides compared to other pretraining datasets used for patch encoders and slide encoders.
“Finally, Mass-340K contains fewer slides compared to other pretraining datasets used for patch encoders12,13,126 and slide encoders62,72.”
From A multimodal whole-slide foundation model for pathology (2025) · cites this paper as [126]
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
The publisher hasn’t deposited this paper’s reference list.
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Fabian Hörst, Moritz Rempe, Lukas Heine, Constantin Seibold, Julius Keyl, Giulia Baldini, Selma Ugurel, Jens Siveke, Barbara Grünwald, Jan Egger, and Jens Kleesiek. Cellvit: Vision transformers for precise cell segmentation and classification, 2023. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.15350. · arXiv
- Jevgenij Gamper, Navid Alemi Koohbanani, Ksenija Benet, Ali Khuram, and Nasir Rajpoot. Pannuke: An open pan-cancer histology dataset for nuclei instance segmentation and classification. In European Congress on Digital Pathology, pages 11-19. Springer, 2019.
- Jevgenij Gamper, Navid Alemi Koohbanani, Simon Graham, Mostafa Jahanifar, Ksenija Benet, Syed Ali Khurram, Ayesha Azam, Katherine Hewitt, and Nasir Rajpoot. Pannuke dataset extension, insights and baselines. arXiv preprint arXiv:2003.10778, 2020. · arXiv
- Alexander Kirillov, Eric Mintun, Nikhila Ravi, Hanzi Mao, Chloe Rolland, Laura Gustafson, Tete Xiao, Spencer Whitehead, Alexander C. Berg, Wan-Yen Lo, Piotr Dollár, and Ross Girshick. Segment anything. arXiv:2304.02643, 2023. · arXiv
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A multimodal whole-slide foundation model for pathology
Ding, T., Wagner, S. J., Song, A. H., Chen, R. J., Lu, M. Y., Zhang, A., Vaidya, A. J., Jaume, G., Shaban, M., Kim, A., et al. (2025) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41591-025-03982-3 · Cited by 171 · see citing works
Artificial intelligence in digital pathology — time for a reality check
Aggarwal, A., Bharadwaj, S., Corredor, G., Pathak, T. B., Badve, S., & Madabhushi, A. (2025) · Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1038/s41571-025-00991-6 · Cited by 78 · see citing works
Benchmarking foundation models as feature extractors for weakly supervised computational pathology
Neidlinger, P., El Nahhas, O. S. M., Muti, H. S., Lenz, T., Hoffmeister, M., Brenner, H., van Treeck, M., Langer, R., Dislich, B., Behrens, H. M., et al. (2025) · Nature Biomedical Engineering · doi:10.1038/s41551-025-01516-3 · Cited by 80 · see citing works
Hu, Y., Li, X., Yi, Y., Huang, Y., Wang, G., & Wang, D. (2025) · Briefings in Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bib/bbaf121 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
Distilling Foundation Models for Robust and Efficient Models in Digital Pathology
Filiot, A., Dop, N., Tchita, O., Riou, A., Dubois, R., Peeters, T., Valter, D., Scalbert, M., Saillard, C., Robin, G., et al. (2026) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-04981-0_16 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
Emerging AI approaches for cancer spatial omics
Noorbakhsh, J., pour, A. F., & Chuang, J. H. (2025) · GigaScience · doi:10.1093/gigascience/giaf128 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
SurGen: 1020 H&E-stained whole-slide images with survival and genetic markers
Myles, C., Um, I. H., Marshall, C., Harris‐Birtill, D., & Harrison, D. J. (2025) · GigaScience · doi:10.1093/gigascience/giaf086 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Huang, Y., Zhao, W., Zhang, Z., Chen, Y., Fu, Y., Wu, F., Jiang, Y., Liang, L., Wang, S., & Yu, L. (2025) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-025-66300-y · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Liu-Swetz, Y., Niksic, M. S., Seethala, R. R., Shasteen, A. M., Foran, D. J., & Bilodeau, E. A. (2025) · npj Digital Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41746-025-02014-1 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Bareja, R., Carrillo‐Pérez, F., Zheng, Y., Pizurica, M., Nandi, T., Shen, J., Madduri, R., & Gevaert, O. (2025) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2025.05.08.25327250 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
AI-driven WHO 2021 classification of gliomas based only on H&E-stained slides
Innani, S., Bell, W. R., Nasrallah, M. P., Baheti, B., & Bakas, S. (2025) · Neuro-Oncology · doi:10.1093/neuonc/noaf189 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Foundation models: Insights and implications for gastrointestinal cancer
Shi, L., Huang, R., Zhao, L.-L., & Guo, A.-J. (2025) · World Journal of Gastroenterology · doi:10.3748/wjg.v31.i47.112921 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Benchmarking pathology foundation models for non-neoplastic pathology in the placentaPreprint
Peng, Z., Ayad, M. A., Jing, Y., Chou, T., Cooper, L., & Goldstein, J. A. (2025) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2025.03.19.25324282 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Gevaert, O., Bareja, R., Carrillo‐Pérez, F., Zheng, Y., Pizurica, M., Nandi, T., Shen, J., & Madduri, R. (2025) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-6823810/v1 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Kasireddy, H. R., Lucarelli, N., Yun, D., Moon, K. C., Rosa, P. S. L., Tomaszewski, J. E., Han, S. S., Shickel, B., Naglah, A., & Sarder, P. (2025) · SPIE Medical Imaging: Digital and Computational Pathology · doi:10.1117/12.3047908 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Kaczmarzyk, J., Alsten, S. C. V., Cozzo, A. J., Gupta, R., Koo, P. K., Troester, M. A., Hoadley, K. A., & Saltz, J. H. (2026) · npj Digital Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41746-025-02334-2 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Skrede, O.-J., Pradhan, M., Isaksen, M. X., Hveem, T. S., Vlatkovic, L., Nesbakken, A., Lindemann, K. Y., Kristensen, G. B., Kasius, J. C., Zeimet, A. G., et al. (2026) · npj Precision Oncology · doi:10.1038/s41698-026-01311-6 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Jeong, W. C., Kim, H. H., Hwang, Y., Hwang, G., Kim, K., & Ko, Y. S. (2026) · medRxiv · doi:10.64898/2026.02.17.26346304 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Jaeckle, F., Gillett, P. M., Kirkwood, K. J., Natu, S., Chan, J. Y. H., Bateman, A. C., Arends, M. J., & Soilleux, E. J. (2026) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.6831533
- Authors
- Nechaev, D., Pchelnikov, A., & Ivanova, E.
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2024
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2406.05074
- OpenAlex
- W4399511651
- Cited by
- 18
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 14
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Licence
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in cancer detection
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Biophysics › Cell Image Analysis Techniques
- Keywords
- digital pathology, whole slide images, transformer pre-training, DINOv2, histopathology image analysis, slide-level classification, patch-based classification, tissue staining
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
