This first work to look at L2D in the context of real-world medical imaging data with human annotations, and introduces a new setup, L2D with Guidance, where the decision space is extended to three choices: predict autonomously, defer to a human expert, or defer to a human expert and provide AI guidance.
Abstract
Medical image interpretation is high-volume and time-consuming, and while AI interpretation can reduce workload, fully autonomous deployment carries potential safety concerns and low specificity may in practice lead to increased clinician workload. Learning to Defer (L2D) addresses this by selectively routing cases between autonomous prediction and human experts by learning from input features and AI model and human performance. While theoretical guarantees have been proven for L2D, its performance has not been validated on real-world medical datasets with human reader annotations. We evaluate the predictor-rejector formulation of two-stage L2D, where the AI predictor model is fixed and separate from the trainable routing or rejector model, on Collab-CXR, a multilabel chest X-ray dataset with multiple human annotations per case. This is the first work to look at L2D in the context of real-world medical imaging data with human annotations. We further introduce a new setup, L2D with Guidance, where the decision space is extended to three choices: predict autonomously, defer to a human expert, or defer to a human expert and provide AI guidance. We compare multiple rejector architectures and loss functions, and different input feature availabilities. This is reproduced on two larger datasets, VinDr-CXR and CheXpert. Our results show that two-stage L2D with Guidance outperforms classic two-stage learning to defer, as well as human-alone, AI-alone and AI-guided human baselines. Notably, this performance is achieved with simpler loss functions compared to formally defined L2D surrogate loss functions in current literature.
This paper investigates developing real-world perception for active agents, proposes Gibson Environment for this purpose, and showcases a set of perceptual tasks learned therein.
F. Xia, Amir Zamir, Zhi-Yang He et al.· 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on...· 1,069 citations· ⚡112
The results indicate that software engineering work practices are chosen opportunistically, adapted and configured to provide value under the constrains imposed by the startup context.
Nicolò Paternoster, Carmine Giardino, M. Unterkalmsteiner et al.· Information and Software Tec...· 394 citations· ⚡54
The possibility of inferring high-dimensional data inference in a model that consists of a prior and an auxiliary differentiable constraint given some additional information is considered, thereby allowing a range of potential applications in adapting models to new domains and tasks.
Alexandros Graikos, Esmeralda S. Whitammer, N. Jojic et al.· Neural Information Processin...· 316 citations· ⚡15
It is proved that any global minimizer of the trajectory balance objective can define a policy that samples exactly from the target distribution, and empirically demonstrate the benefits of the trajectories balance objective for GFlowNet convergence, diversity of generated samples, and robustness to long action sequenc...
Esmeralda S. Whitammer, Moksh Jain, Emmanuel Bengio et al.· Neural Information Processin...· 302 citations· ⚡60
An algorithm is proposed which leverages disentangled semantic factors to generate adversarial perturbation by altering controlled semantic attributes to fool the learner towards various "adversarial" targets.
Haonan Qiu, Chaowei Xiao, Lei Yang et al.· arXiv.org· 208 citations· ⚡17
This work proposes a HALO that directly maximizes the utility of generations instead of maximizing the log-likelihood of preferences, and suggests that the best loss depends on the inductive biases most appropriate for a given setting, an oft-overlooked consideration.
Assistant Professor Benjamin Lindquist studies how engineers deliberately injected randomness into early AI, giving rise to deep-learning models that sometimes hallucinate.