Showing 1–6 of 6 results for author: Belgrave, D

Consensus, dissensus and synergy between clinicians and specialist foundation models in radiology report generation

Authors: Ryutaro Tanno, David G. T. Barrett, Andrew Sellergren, Sumedh Ghaisas, Sumanth Dathathri, Abigail See, Johannes Welbl, Karan Singhal, Shekoofeh Azizi, Tao Tu, Mike Schaekermann, Rhys May, Roy Lee, SiWai Man, Zahra Ahmed, Sara Mahdavi, Yossi Matias, Joelle Barral, Ali Eslami, Danielle Belgrave, Vivek Natarajan, Shravya Shetty, Pushmeet Kohli, Po-Sen Huang, Alan Karthikesalingam , et al. (1 additional authors not shown)

Abstract: Radiology reports are an instrumental part of modern medicine, informing key clinical decisions such as diagnosis and treatment. The worldwide shortage of radiologists, however, restricts access to expert care and imposes heavy workloads, contributing to avoidable errors and delays in report delivery. While recent progress in automated report generation with vision-language models offer clear pote… ▽ More Radiology reports are an instrumental part of modern medicine, informing key clinical decisions such as diagnosis and treatment. The worldwide shortage of radiologists, however, restricts access to expert care and imposes heavy workloads, contributing to avoidable errors and delays in report delivery. While recent progress in automated report generation with vision-language models offer clear potential in ameliorating the situation, the path to real-world adoption has been stymied by the challenge of evaluating the clinical quality of AI-generated reports. In this study, we build a state-of-the-art report generation system for chest radiographs, $\textit{Flamingo-CXR}$, by fine-tuning a well-known vision-language foundation model on radiology data. To evaluate the quality of the AI-generated reports, a group of 16 certified radiologists provide detailed evaluations of AI-generated and human written reports for chest X-rays from an intensive care setting in the United States and an inpatient setting in India. At least one radiologist (out of two per case) preferred the AI report to the ground truth report in over 60$\%$ of cases for both datasets. Amongst the subset of AI-generated reports that contain errors, the most frequently cited reasons were related to the location and finding, whereas for human written reports, most mistakes were related to severity and finding. This disparity suggested potential complementarity between our AI system and human experts, prompting us to develop an assistive scenario in which Flamingo-CXR generates a first-draft report, which is subsequently revised by a clinician. This is the first demonstration of clinician-AI collaboration for report writing, and the resultant reports are assessed to be equivalent or preferred by at least one radiologist to reports written by experts alone in 80$\%$ of in-patient cases and 60$\%$ of intensive care cases. △ Less

Submitted 20 December, 2023; v1 submitted 30 November, 2023; originally announced November 2023.

Peer Reviews of Peer Reviews: A Randomized Controlled Trial and Other Experiments

Authors: Alexander Goldberg, Ivan Stelmakh, Kyunghyun Cho, Alice Oh, Alekh Agarwal, Danielle Belgrave, Nihar B. Shah

Abstract: Is it possible to reliably evaluate the quality of peer reviews? We study this question driven by two primary motivations -- incentivizing high-quality reviewing using assessed quality of reviews and measuring changes to review quality in experiments. We conduct a large scale study at the NeurIPS 2022 conference, a top-tier conference in machine learning, in which we invited (meta)-reviewers and a… ▽ More Is it possible to reliably evaluate the quality of peer reviews? We study this question driven by two primary motivations -- incentivizing high-quality reviewing using assessed quality of reviews and measuring changes to review quality in experiments. We conduct a large scale study at the NeurIPS 2022 conference, a top-tier conference in machine learning, in which we invited (meta)-reviewers and authors to evaluate reviews given to submitted papers. First, we conduct a RCT to examine bias due to the length of reviews. We generate elongated versions of reviews by adding substantial amounts of non-informative content. Participants in the control group evaluate the original reviews, whereas participants in the experimental group evaluate the artificially lengthened versions. We find that lengthened reviews are scored (statistically significantly) higher quality than the original reviews. Additionally, in analysis of observational data we find that authors are positively biased towards reviews recommending acceptance of their own papers, even after controlling for confounders of review length, quality, and different numbers of papers per author. We also measure disagreement rates between multiple evaluations of the same review of 28%-32%, which is comparable to that of paper reviewers at NeurIPS. Further, we assess the amount of miscalibration of evaluators of reviews using a linear model of quality scores and find that it is similar to estimates of miscalibration of paper reviewers at NeurIPS. Finally, we estimate the amount of variability in subjective opinions around how to map individual criteria to overall scores of review quality and find that it is roughly the same as that in the review of papers. Our results suggest that the various problems that exist in reviews of papers -- inconsistency, bias towards irrelevant factors, miscalibration, subjectivity -- also arise in reviewing of reviews. △ Less

Submitted 15 November, 2023; originally announced November 2023.

Generative models improve fairness of medical classifiers under distribution shifts

Authors: Ira Ktena, Olivia Wiles, Isabela Albuquerque, Sylvestre-Alvise Rebuffi, Ryutaro Tanno, Abhijit Guha Roy, Shekoofeh Azizi, Danielle Belgrave, Pushmeet Kohli, Alan Karthikesalingam, Taylan Cemgil, Sven Gowal

Abstract: A ubiquitous challenge in machine learning is the problem of domain generalisation. This can exacerbate bias against groups or labels that are underrepresented in the datasets used for model development. Model bias can lead to unintended harms, especially in safety-critical applications like healthcare. Furthermore, the challenge is compounded by the difficulty of obtaining labelled data due to hi… ▽ More A ubiquitous challenge in machine learning is the problem of domain generalisation. This can exacerbate bias against groups or labels that are underrepresented in the datasets used for model development. Model bias can lead to unintended harms, especially in safety-critical applications like healthcare. Furthermore, the challenge is compounded by the difficulty of obtaining labelled data due to high cost or lack of readily available domain expertise. In our work, we show that learning realistic augmentations automatically from data is possible in a label-efficient manner using generative models. In particular, we leverage the higher abundance of unlabelled data to capture the underlying data distribution of different conditions and subgroups for an imaging modality. By conditioning generative models on appropriate labels, we can steer the distribution of synthetic examples according to specific requirements. We demonstrate that these learned augmentations can surpass heuristic ones by making models more robust and statistically fair in- and out-of-distribution. To evaluate the generality of our approach, we study 3 distinct medical imaging contexts of varying difficulty: (i) histopathology images from a publicly available generalisation benchmark, (ii) chest X-rays from publicly available clinical datasets, and (iii) dermatology images characterised by complex shifts and imaging conditions. Complementing real training samples with synthetic ones improves the robustness of models in all three medical tasks and increases fairness by improving the accuracy of diagnosis within underrepresented groups. This approach leads to stark improvements OOD across modalities: 7.7% prediction accuracy improvement in histopathology, 5.2% in chest radiology with 44.6% lower fairness gap and a striking 63.5% improvement in high-risk sensitivity for dermatology with a 7.5x reduction in fairness gap. △ Less

Submitted 18 April, 2023; originally announced April 2023.

Active Acquisition for Multimodal Temporal Data: A Challenging Decision-Making Task

Authors: Jannik Kossen, Cătălina Cangea, Eszter Vértes, Andrew Jaegle, Viorica Patraucean, Ira Ktena, Nenad Tomasev, Danielle Belgrave

Abstract: We introduce a challenging decision-making task that we call active acquisition for multimodal temporal data (A2MT). In many real-world scenarios, input features are not readily available at test time and must instead be acquired at significant cost. With A2MT, we aim to learn agents that actively select which modalities of an input to acquire, trading off acquisition cost and predictive performan… ▽ More We introduce a challenging decision-making task that we call active acquisition for multimodal temporal data (A2MT). In many real-world scenarios, input features are not readily available at test time and must instead be acquired at significant cost. With A2MT, we aim to learn agents that actively select which modalities of an input to acquire, trading off acquisition cost and predictive performance. A2MT extends a previous task called active feature acquisition to temporal decision making about high-dimensional inputs. We propose a method based on the Perceiver IO architecture to address A2MT in practice. Our agents are able to solve a novel synthetic scenario requiring practically relevant cross-modal reasoning skills. On two large-scale, real-world datasets, Kinetics-700 and AudioSet, our agents successfully learn cost-reactive acquisition behavior. However, an ablation reveals they are unable to learn adaptive acquisition strategies, emphasizing the difficulty of the task even for state-of-the-art models. Applications of A2MT may be impactful in domains like medicine, robotics, or finance, where modalities differ in acquisition cost and informativeness. △ Less

Submitted 3 July, 2023; v1 submitted 9 November, 2022; originally announced November 2022.

Comments: Published in Transactions on Machine Learning Research. Previous version accepted to Foundation Models for Decision Making Workshop at NeurIPS 2022

Causal Bandits without prior knowledge using separating sets

Authors: Arnoud A. W. M. de Kroon, Danielle Belgrave, Joris M. Mooij

Abstract: The Causal Bandit is a variant of the classic Bandit problem where an agent must identify the best action in a sequential decision-making process, where the reward distribution of the actions displays a non-trivial dependence structure that is governed by a causal model. Methods proposed for this problem thus far in the literature rely on exact prior knowledge of the full causal graph. We formulat… ▽ More The Causal Bandit is a variant of the classic Bandit problem where an agent must identify the best action in a sequential decision-making process, where the reward distribution of the actions displays a non-trivial dependence structure that is governed by a causal model. Methods proposed for this problem thus far in the literature rely on exact prior knowledge of the full causal graph. We formulate new causal bandit algorithms that no longer necessarily rely on prior causal knowledge. Instead, they utilize an estimator based on separating sets, which we can find using simple conditional independence tests or causal discovery methods. We show that, given a true separating set, for discrete i.i.d. data, this estimator is unbiased, and has variance which is upper bounded by that of the sample mean. We develop algorithms based on Thompson Sampling and UCB for discrete and Gaussian models respectively and show increased performance on simulation data as well as on a bandit drawing from real-world protein signaling data. △ Less

Submitted 29 September, 2022; v1 submitted 16 September, 2020; originally announced September 2020.

Hide-and-Seek Privacy Challenge

Authors: James Jordon, Daniel Jarrett, Jinsung Yoon, Tavian Barnes, Paul Elbers, Patrick Thoral, Ari Ercole, Cheng Zhang, Danielle Belgrave, Mihaela van der Schaar

Abstract: The clinical time-series setting poses a unique combination of challenges to data modeling and sharing. Due to the high dimensionality of clinical time series, adequate de-identification to preserve privacy while retaining data utility is difficult to achieve using common de-identification techniques. An innovative approach to this problem is synthetic data generation. From a technical perspective… ▽ More The clinical time-series setting poses a unique combination of challenges to data modeling and sharing. Due to the high dimensionality of clinical time series, adequate de-identification to preserve privacy while retaining data utility is difficult to achieve using common de-identification techniques. An innovative approach to this problem is synthetic data generation. From a technical perspective, a good generative model for time-series data should preserve temporal dynamics, in the sense that new sequences respect the original relationships between high-dimensional variables across time. From the privacy perspective, the model should prevent patient re-identification by limiting vulnerability to membership inference attacks. The NeurIPS 2020 Hide-and-Seek Privacy Challenge is a novel two-tracked competition to simultaneously accelerate progress in tackling both problems. In our head-to-head format, participants in the synthetic data generation track (i.e. "hiders") and the patient re-identification track (i.e. "seekers") are directly pitted against each other by way of a new, high-quality intensive care time-series dataset: the AmsterdamUMCdb dataset. Ultimately, we seek to advance generative techniques for dense and high-dimensional temporal data streams that are (1) clinically meaningful in terms of fidelity and predictivity, as well as (2) capable of minimizing membership privacy risks in terms of the concrete notion of patient re-identification. △ Less

Submitted 24 July, 2020; v1 submitted 23 July, 2020; originally announced July 2020.

Comments: 19 pages, 5 figures. Part of the NeurIPS 2020 competition track