arXiv:2506.18434cs.CVcs.AI2025-06被引 10

对比大模型与传统模型在医学影像预后预测中的表现,发现数据充足时大模型+参数高效微调更优。

Benchmarking Foundation Models and Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning for Prognosis Prediction in Medical Imaging

  • 用四个新冠胸部X光数据集,系统比较了大模型与传统CNN在不同微调策略下的表现。
  • 数据少且类别不平衡时,传统CNN全量微调最稳定;数据多时,大模型用LoRA等参数高效方法表现接近甚至更好。
  • 在小样本场景下大模型泛化能力弱,线性探测结果最可靠,适合临床资源有限的场景。

尽管基础模型(FMs)在医学影像中潜力巨大,但因数据稀缺、类别不平衡和任务复杂性,其在预后预测中的应用仍具挑战,限制了临床落地。本研究首次构建系统性基准,评估基础模型与卷积神经网络(CNNs)在从胸部X光预测新冠患者结局中的迁移学习策略表现。基于四个公开的新冠胸片数据集(涵盖死亡率、严重程度和重症监护室入院),在样本量与类别不平衡各异的条件下,对ImageNet预训练的CNN及通用或生物医学领域预训练的基础模型,采用全量微调、线性探测及参数高效微调(如LoRA、BitFit)进行比较。在完整数据与少样本设置下,使用马修斯相关系数(MCC)和精确率-召回率曲线下面积(PR-AUC)进行评估,并结合交叉验证与类别加权损失。结果显示:小样本、不平衡数据下,全量微调的CNN表现稳健;大样本下,参数高效微调的基模表现可媲美甚至超越,但严重类别不平衡会显著削弱其性能,而数据平衡则缓解此问题。少样本场景中,基模泛化能力有限,线性探测结果最稳定。无单一策略普适最优:低资源场景仍推荐传统CNN,数据充足时大模型配合参数高效微调更具优势。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

Despite the significant potential of Foundation Models (FMs) in medical imaging, their application to prognosis prediction remains challenging due to data scarcity, class imbalance, and task complexity, which limit their clinical adoption. This study introduces the first structured benchmark to assess the robustness and efficiency of transfer learning strategies for FMs compared with convolutional neural networks (CNNs) in predicting COVID-19 patient outcomes from chest X-rays. The goal is to systematically compare finetuning strategies, both classical and parameter efficient, under realistic clinical constraints related to data scarcity and class imbalance, offering empirical guidance for AI deployment in clinical workflows. Four publicly available COVID-19 chest X-ray datasets were used, covering mortality, severity, and ICU admission, with varying sample sizes and class imbalances. CNNs pretrained on ImageNet and FMs pretrained on general or biomedical datasets were adapted using full finetuning, linear probing, and parameter-efficient methods. Models were evaluated under full data and few shot regimes using the Matthews Correlation Coefficient (MCC) and Precision Recall AUC (PR-AUC), with cross validation and class weighted losses. CNNs with full fine-tuning performed robustly on small, imbalanced datasets, while FMs with Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuning (PEFT), particularly LoRA and BitFit, achieved competitive results on larger datasets. Severe class imbalance degraded PEFT performance, whereas balanced data mitigated this effect. In few-shot settings, FMs showed limited generalization, with linear probing yielding the most stable results. No single fine-tuning strategy proved universally optimal: CNNs remain dependable for low-resource scenarios, whereas FMs benefit from parameter-efficient methods when data are sufficient.

医学影像大模型微调策略预后预测

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。