Biomedical image analysis competitions: The state of current participation practice

The number of international benchmarking competitions is steadily increasing in various fields of machine learning (ML) research and practice. So far, however, little is known about the common practice as well as bottlenecks faced by the community in tackling the research questions posed. To shed light on the status quo of algorithm development in the specific field of biomedical imaging analysis, we designed an international survey that was issued to all participants of challenges conducted in conjunction with the IEEE ISBI 2021 and MICCAI 2021 conferences (80 competitions in total). The survey covered participants' expertise and working environments, their chosen strategies, as well as algorithm characteristics. A median of 72% challenge participants took part in the survey. According to our results, knowledge exchange was the primary incentive (70%) for participation, while the reception of prize money played only a minor role (16%). While a median of 80 working hours was spent on method development, a large portion of participants stated that they did not have enough time for method development (32%). 25% perceived the infrastructure to be a bottleneck. Overall, 94% of all solutions were deep learning-based. Of these, 84% were based on standard architectures. 43% of the respondents reported that the data samples (e.g., images) were too large to be processed at once. This was most commonly addressed by patch-based training (69%), downsampling (37%), and solving 3D analysis tasks as a series of 2D tasks. K-fold cross-validation on the training set was performed by only 37% of the participants and only 50% of the participants performed ensembling based on multiple identical models (61%) or heterogeneous models (39%). 48% of the respondents applied postprocessing steps.

Assessing generalisability of deep learning-based polyp detection and segmentation methods through a computer vision challenge

Polyps are well-known cancer precursors identified by colonoscopy. However, variability in their size, location, and surface largely affect identification, localisation, and characterisation. Moreover, colonoscopic surveillance and removal of polyps (referred to as polypectomy ) are highly operator-dependent procedures. There exist a high missed detection rate and incomplete removal of colonic polyps due to their variable nature, the difficulties to delineate the abnormality, the high recurrence rates, and the anatomical topography of the colon. There have been several developments in realising automated methods for both detection and segmentation of these polyps using machine learning. However, the major drawback in most of these methods is their ability to generalise to out-of-sample unseen datasets that come from different centres, modalities and acquisition systems. To test this hypothesis rigorously we curated a multi-centre and multi-population dataset acquired from multiple colonoscopy systems and challenged teams comprising machine learning experts to develop robust automated detection and segmentation methods as part of our crowd-sourcing Endoscopic computer vision challenge (EndoCV) 2021. In this paper, we analyse the detection results of the four top (among seven) teams and the segmentation results of the five top teams (among 16). Our analyses demonstrate that the top-ranking teams concentrated on accuracy (i.e., accuracy > 80% on overall Dice score on different validation sets) over real-time performance required for clinical applicability. We further dissect the methods and provide an experiment-based hypothesis that reveals the need for improved generalisability to tackle diversity present in multi-centre datasets.