Background and Objective: Quality control is a prerequisite for whole-slide image analysis, yet the benchmarks on which quality-control methods are compared share four properties that make their reported differences hard to interpret: few independent slides, annotation concentrated in a minority of them, pooled ratio metrics with no closed-form standard error, and a single inherited train/test partition. We propose a reliability protocol for such benchmarks. Methods: The protocol quantifies four sources of variability - test-set sampling, training stochasticity, partition composition, and undocumented preprocessing - a claim is reportable only if it survives all four; three of the four cost minutes of compute. We apply it to an independent reconstruction of a published diffusion-based artifact detector, evaluated on the original 24-slide partition and against a supervised baseline. Results: The method's central mechanism reproduces: the auxiliary contrastive term improves pooled F1 from 0.673 to 0.688 and replicates under a second seed (+0.0156, p = 0.031; +0.0190, p = 0.005), although it acts on pen marking rather than the artifact types cited to motivate it. Its comparative claims do not: differences between design variants, and against the supervised baseline, fall inside the uncertainty of the evaluation. Four of 24 slides carry 70% of scored annotated pixels, giving an effective sample size of 6.2, and the inherited partition sits at the 7th percentile. An unreported tissue-restriction step excludes 41.4% of out-of-focus annotation against 2.6% of air bubble; such a gate is confounded with blur by construction. Conclusions: Small-cohort benchmarks support far weaker conclusions than current reporting implies. The four checks are cheap enough to accompany any evaluation on such a resource and separate reproducible effects from differences the evaluation cannot resolve.
Vanessa Borst, Lukas Horn, Daniel Grillmeyer +2cs.CV cs.AI
Despite rapid advances in MIS, fair and reproducible comparisons of segmentation models remain challenging due to heterogeneous datasets, inconsistent evaluation protocols, and rapidly evolving architectures. In particular, comparisons often implicitly assume that model rankings are invariant to data partitioning, preprocessing, metric aggregation, uncertainty estimation, and computational constraints. The lack of extensible and unified evaluation frameworks further limits systematic investigation of new models, datasets, and training paradigms. We present MEDSEGBENCHMARKER (MSB), a configuration-driven framework for controlled benchmarking of 2D MIS. It integrates duplicate and near-duplicate image detection, group-aware data splitting, YAML study specifications, resumable training, hyperparameter optimization, cross-validation, and checkpoint-based evaluation. Rather than retaining only aggregate performance measures, MSB exports sample- and class-level pixel counts and predictions together with the evaluation context. These elementary artifacts enable post-hoc analyses without repeated inference. We demonstrate MSB in a case study involving three heterogeneous 2D datasets and multiple MIS and general-purpose vision models evaluated at 256- and 512-pixel input resolutions. Reaggregation of identical predictions changes the top-ranked architecture in three of six dataset-resolution settings, despite high rank correlations between aggregation strategies. Increasing input resolution produces model- and dataset-dependent performance gains and losses that must be considered alongside empirically measured inference complexity. These results show that seemingly minor choices in evaluation and experimental setup can affect benchmark conclusions. MSB, available at GitHub, provides a practical and extensible basis for making benchmark conditions and evaluation choices explicit and reproducible.
Begoña B. Sierra, Colin McLean, Peter S. Hall +2stat.ML cs.LG
A wide range of statistical and machine learning methods have been proposed for survival analysis with competing risks, where the occurrence of one event (i.e., cancer death) precludes the occurrence of other events (i.e., cardiovascular disease death). Despite these methodological advances, their systematic evaluation and adoption are limited by the lack of comprehensive, reproducible and extensible benchmarking frameworks. We developed an open-source benchmarking framework for competing risks models that enables their systematic comparison across multiple datasets under different aspects of performance; calibration, discrimination, overall prediction error and clinical utility. We additionally introduce an extension of SHAP for competing risks, allowing model-agnostic interpretability of covariates contributions over time. All our code is publicly available via GitHub:https://github.com/BBolosSierra/CompRisksBenchmark
Andreas Maier, Lucas Kachelriess, Siming Bayer +4physics.med-ph cs.AI cs.CV
Comparing CT reconstruction methods fairly is labor-intensive and largely manual, and many benchmarks use idealized data. We ask whether a large language model (LLM) agent can do the labor of reconstruction research on its own, and whether a ranking measured on ideal data predicts behavior under realistic noise. We built an agentic loop: the agent edits a solver, runs a short cluster job, reads one frozen metric, and revises. The metric is a calibrated headroom score against the FBP baseline, inside the field of view; every method shares the same differentiable fan-beam projector. We benchmarked 26 methods on Mayo low-dose CT (noise-limited) and a 128-view sparse-view breast task from the noiseless DL-Sparse-View Challenge, with validation-selected iterations scored on a held-out test set. Every trained breast model was then re-scored on noisy inputs (I_0 = 10^5 photons) without retraining, and separately retrained on matched noise. The agent independently implemented, tuned, and benchmarked all 26 methods, and recombined them into a compact solver of 969 parameters that ties the top Mayo tier at the 1% level using 0.4% of the champion's parameters. Benchmarking gives a tier of statistically indistinguishable top methods, not one winner. Mild input noise nearly inverts the breast ranking: the noiseless champion (a supervised image denoiser, hr 0.89) collapses to 0.00, while a learned primal-dual method rises to champion (0.72 to 0.93). An ideal-data leaderboard therefore does not predict robustness. The inversion is a transfer effect, not a permanent deficit: retraining on matched noise restores much of the clean ranking (Spearman rho 0.04 to 0.61). Noise is only the easiest confounder in an open-ended set (beam hardening, scatter, anatomy, disease), so no single-factor challenge certifies generality. Benchmarks should model a broad spectrum of realistic factors at once.
Davide Marelli, Giorgia Rigamonti, Mirko Paolo Barbato +1cs.LG cs.AI
Preprocessing blood glucose time-series data is a critical yet often overlooked step in developing data-driven methods for diabetes management, particularly for type 1 diabetes. The lack of standardized preprocessing workflows and evaluation protocols hinders reproducibility and complicates fair comparison across studies. These challenges are further exacerbated by data-sharing restrictions, as privacy and licensing constraints often prevent the redistribution of preprocessed medical datasets. To address these limitations, we present GlucoTune, a comprehensive and extensible framework for reproducible experimentation with blood glucose time-series data. The framework standardizes the entire experimental workflow, from preprocessing to model evaluation, enabling reproducible experiments directly from the original datasets. Reproducible preprocessing is achieved through configurable pipelines defined in portable YAML configuration files, ensuring consistent data handling without distributing sensitive preprocessed data. Beyond preprocessing, GlucoTune provides a unified interface for implementing, training, and evaluating blood glucose prediction models. The framework integrates public datasets through standardized wrappers and provides a curated collection of state-of-the-art blood glucose prediction and general time-series forecasting methods, while remaining readily extensible to additional datasets, preprocessing strategies, and forecasting models. To promote transparent and consistent evaluation, GlucoTune includes a benchmarking leaderboard that reports results across datasets, preprocessing configurations, and forecasting methods, enabling systematic comparison of experimental settings. We demonstrate the effectiveness of GlucoTune through comprehensive experiments and assess its usability in a user study.
Motivation: Rare disease (RD) diagnosis is frequently delayed due to the similarities in symptoms to common disease variants. Machine Learning Algorithms applied to Electronic Health Records show promise for accelerating the diagnosis; however, legal and privacy concerns pose significant barriers. To address these issues, Synthetic Data Generation is an alternative method for obtaining Electronic Health Records and can be applied with any Machine Learning algorithm for benchmarking and development purposes. Despite the availability of Synthetic Data Generation algorithms, support for generating a subset of patients that differ in a definable degree from the majority to simulate patients with RD is often lacking. Results: We present SYNRARE, a graphical user interface based on the Synthea framework that enables easier modification and generation of synthetic Electronic Health Records of RD patients, which differ only to a definable degree from patients with common diseases, thereby enabling the benchmarking and testing of algorithms under controlled technical conditions. SYNRARE enables researchers to rapidly benchmark their Machine Learning algorithms across any scenario. Availability and implementation: SYNRARE, including detailed instructions for installing, is available at https://gitlab.sdu.dk/screen4care/synrare.
Forecasting models for health-signal digital twins must preserve the oscillatory, frequency, phase, and state-transition dynamics of physiological signals, yet the pointwise metrics used to benchmark them cannot detect when these fundamental properties are lost. We show that this blind spot misranks models: across 11 architectures, models with comparable pointwise error diverge by up to 53° in phase accuracy, equivalent to roughly 123 ms for a 1.2 Hz cardiac rhythm and invisible to standard metrics. To enable development of models that escape such failures, we introduce TimeSynth, a controlled benchmarking framework with two reusable components: a physiologically grounded generator producing signals with analytically known ground-truth dynamics from parametric models fitted to real electroencephalography, electrocardiography and photoplethysmogram signals, along with diagnostics quantifying amplitude, frequency, phase, and state-transition fidelity. Linear and full-sequence attention models systematically lose frequency and phase information despite acceptable amplitude error, whereas architectures with localized temporal structure better preserve dynamical fidelity and adapt to observable state transitions; none, however, reliably preserves stochastic switching. Because the dominant determinant of fidelity is architectural, model choice becomes a principled, use-case-driven decision rather than a search for a single winner. TimeSynth thus supplies the controlled preclinical stress test missing before models are coupled to patient data, with a reusable generator and diagnostics for fidelity-aware development.
Estrogen Receptor (ER) status is a critical biomarker in breast cancer diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment selection. Recent advances in high-throughput sequencing technologies have enabled the generation of multi-omics datasets that provide complementary molecular information for computational prediction tasks. This study presents a systematic benchmarking analysis of classical machine learning models for ER status prediction using transcriptomic (RNA expression), genomic (copy number variation; CNV), and proteomic (RPPA) data from the TCGA-BRCA cohort. A rigorous experimental framework incorporating stratified train-test splitting, stratified five-fold cross-validation, class imbalance handling, and fold-specific feature selection was employed to ensure reliable evaluation and prevent data leakage. Random Forest, XGBoost, LightGBM, CatBoost, Support Vector Machines (SVM), and Logistic Regression were evaluated across single-omic and multi-omic settings. Results demonstrated that RNA expression provided the strongest predictive signal, while multi-omic integration yielded modest but consistent improvements over individual modalities. Among all evaluated approaches, Random Forest achieved the best overall performance in the integrated multi-omic setting, obtaining a balanced accuracy of 90.3\% and an ROC-AUC of 97.1\%. Furthermore, recurrent selection of biologically relevant genes, including \textit{ESR1}, \textit{PGR}, \textit{FOXA1}, and \textit{GATA3}, supported the biological validity of the learned models. These findings indicate that carefully regularized classical machine learning methods remain highly effective for small, high-dimensional genomic datasets and that multi-omic integration provides complementary information for breast cancer ER status prediction.
Electroencephalography (EEG) foundation models increasingly rely on multi-dataset training and evaluation, yet public EEG datasets still lack a shared task specification layer that can turn heterogeneous recordings into reusable benchmark units. Existing standards organize files, metadata, and provenance, but they do not specify EEG tasks under a common language and rulebook, leaving critical task semantics scattered across papers, code, and manual interpretation. We investigate whether heterogeneous public EEG datasets can be standardized through a structured task specification language paired with a shared rulebook. Our methodology represents each benchmark entry as a task document synchronized with an executable task kernel, with the rulebook defining task fields, evidence requirements, document-kernel alignment, review states, and machine-checkable constraints. Using this methodology, we release a community-reviewed EEG benchmark corpus centered on 53 completed and reviewed entries with 245 task definitions spanning diverse paradigms, and we introduce NeuroDoc and NeuroAudit as the operational support layer for rulebook-guided drafting, upgrading, review, amendment, and release management. We further examine whether the resulting benchmark units can be instantiated in a shared downstream setting across four EEG foundation model backbones, providing execution-based evidence for reusable, auditable, and executable EEG benchmarking infrastructure.
Biomolecular sequence models are increasingly reused outside the studies in which they were introduced, but public checkpoints rarely preserve the execution context needed to inspect source-defined behavior, adapt models to new assays, compare models under shared task definitions or deploy biological predictions. MultiMolecule is an open-source Python ecosystem that turns heterogeneous RNA, DNA and protein sequence-model releases into complete, source-checked model-family implementations with shared loading, workflow and prediction interfaces. The Resource state reported here includes 53 complete model-family implementations with 112 standardized model checkpoints, together with 16 curated dataset resources released through 39 public dataset repositories and 10 user-facing prediction pipelines. Standardized components are linked to source provenance, conversion or preparation code, source-reference checks, Extended Data summaries and public documentation, allowing users to inspect what was standardized, what behavior was checked and how each component enters training, evaluation, inference or deployment. By shifting reuse from repository-specific checkpoints to executable implementations connected to standardized checkpoints, curated datasets, Runner workflows and biological prediction pipelines, MultiMolecule provides common infrastructure for preserving source-defined model behavior, adapting models to new assays, enabling controlled evaluation and deploying biomolecular predictions.
Sofiène Boutaj, Leo Fillioux, Maria Vakalopoulou +2cs.CV
Foundation Models (FMs) have recently redefined the state-of-the-art in histopathology by providing robust representations for whole-slide image (WSI) analysis. However, selecting the optimal foundation model (FM) for a specific clinical cohort currently requires multiple preprocessing steps, followed by computationally expensive feature extraction and the training of a Multiple Instance Learning (MIL) aggregator for every model. In this work, we investigate whether efficient tile-level linear probing can serve as a reliable proxy for slide-level performance, reducing the need to run full slide-level pipelines for every candidate encoder. We benchmark 19 state-of-the-art FMs on 42 slide-level and 16 tile-level tasks, comparing tile probing metrics against slide-level outcomes using ABMIL and Mean Pooling aggregations. We observe a high correlation between tile and slide performance across varying task difficulties, indicating that encoder representation quality is the primary determinant of WSI success. Sensitivity analyses show that transferability is stable across models and is more influenced by cohort sizes and numbers of tiles per slide than by average task difficulty. We also measure the agreement in best performing models between tile and slide-level tasks, showing tile benchmarks reliably shortlist strong candidates. Overall, our study indicates that tile-level benchmarking provides an efficient and practical first step for narrowing down candidate models, while slide-level evaluation remains essential for final validation on clinical tasks.
The generation of high-fidelity synthetic Electronic Health Records (EHR) is crucial for advancing medical research while preserving patient privacy. However, head-to-head comparison of existing generative models is hindered by disjointed codebases, incompatible data loaders, conflicting library dependencies, and inconsistent evaluation protocols. To address these gaps, we introduce a lightweight, end-to-end benchmarking framework for reproducible synthetic EHR evaluation, organized as a unified pipeline spanning data ingestion, standardized model training, and architecture-agnostic evaluation. Our current implementation targets the generation of longitudinal ICD diagnosis codes -- the most commonly studied modality in this literature -- and is built on the community-maintained PyHealth library. We reimplement and unify strong baselines (MedGAN, CorGAN, PromptEHR, HALO) under full ICD-9 vocabulary granularity, and add a lightweight GPT-2 baseline from the general-purpose sequence-modeling literature. We contribute a rigorous, architecture-agnostic privacy-utility evaluation suite that applies identically to GAN- and transformer-based generators, and report bootstrapped confidence intervals across all metrics. We further analyze the poor long-tailed performance of existing models and discuss the extensibility of our framework beyond diagnosis codes. By lowering the engineering barrier to running, extending, and evaluating under a single pipeline, we introduce a starting point for community-driven reproducibility and benchmarking synthetic EHR models.