Skip to main content

Concept-Centric Visual Turing Tests for Method Validation

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Book cover Medical Image Computing and Computer Assisted Intervention – MICCAI 2019 (MICCAI 2019)

Abstract

Recent advances in machine learning for medical imaging have led to impressive increases in model complexity and overall capabilities. However, the ability to discern the precise information a machine learning method is using to make decisions has lagged behind and it is often unclear how these performances are in fact achieved. Conventional evaluation metrics that reduce method performance to a single number or a curve only provide limited insights. Yet, systems used in clinical practice demand thorough validation that such crude characterizations miss. To this end, we present a framework to evaluate classification methods based on a number of interpretable concepts that are crucial for a clinical task. Our approach is inspired by the Turing Test concept and how to devise a test that adaptively questions a method for its ability to interpret medical images. To do this, we make use of a Twenty Questions paradigm whereby we use a probabilistic model to characterize the method’s capacity to grasp task-specific concepts, and we introduce a strategy to sequentially query the method according to its previous answers. The results show that the probabilistic model is able to expose both the dataset’s and the method’s biases, and can be used to reduce the number of queries needed for confident performance evaluation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The approach would be unchanged if the outcome frequency was used.

  2. 2.

    https://challenge2018.isic-archive.com/.

References

  1. Antol, S., et al.: VQA: visual question answering. In: The IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), December 2015

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bendig, A.: Twenty questions: an information analysis. J. Exp. Psychol. 5, 345–348 (1953)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Chuquicusma, M.J., Hussein, S., Burt, J., Bagci, U.: How to fool radiologists with generative adversarial networks? a visual turing test for lung cancer diagnosis. In: 2018 IEEE 15th International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI 2018), pp. 240–244. IEEE (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Geman, D., Geman, S., Hallonquist, N., Younes, L.: Visual turing test for computer vision systems. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 112(12), 3618–3623 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Hasan, S.A., Ling, Y., Farri, O., Liu, J., Lungren, M., Müller, H.: Overview of the ImageCLEF 2018 medical domain visual question answering task. In: CLEF 2018 Working Notes (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  6. He, K., Zhang, X., Ren, S., Sun, J.: Deep residual learning for image recognition. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 770–778 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Jedynak, B., Frazier, P., Sznitman, R.: Twenty questions with noise: Bayes optimal policies for entropy loss. J. Appl. Probab. 1, 114–136 (2012)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Lau, J.J., Gayen, S., Abacha, A.B., Demner-Fushman, D.: A dataset of clinically generated visual questions and answers about radiology images. Sci. Data 5, 180251 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Maier-Hein, L., et al.: Author correction: why rankings of biomedical image analysis competitions should be interpreted with care. Nat. Commun. 10(1), 588 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Prasanna, P., et al.: Indian diabetic retinopathy image dataset (IDRiD) (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Rasmussen, C.E.: Gaussian Processes for Machine Learning. MIT Press, Cambridge (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Schlegl, T., Seeböck, P., Waldstein, S.M., Langs, G., Schmidt-Erfurth, U.: f-AnoGAN: fast unsupervised anomaly detection with generative adversarial networks. Med. Image Anal. 54, 30–44 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Turing, A.: Computing machinery and intelligence. Mind 49(236), 433–460 (1950)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Wu, Q., Teney, D., Wang, P., Shen, C., Dick, A., van den Hengel, A.: Visual question answering: a survey of methods and datasets. Comput. Vis. Image Underst. 163, 21–40 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Yu, F., Koltun, V., Funkhouser, T.: Dilated residual networks, May 2017

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tatiana Fountoukidou .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Fountoukidou, T., Sznitman, R. (2019). Concept-Centric Visual Turing Tests for Method Validation. In: Shen, D., et al. Medical Image Computing and Computer Assisted Intervention – MICCAI 2019. MICCAI 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11768. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32254-0_29

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32254-0_29

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-32253-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-32254-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics