Biomedical image analysis competitions: The state of current participation practice
Authors:
Matthias Eisenmann,
Annika Reinke,
Vivienn Weru,
Minu Dietlinde Tizabi,
Fabian Isensee,
Tim J. Adler,
Patrick Godau,
Veronika Cheplygina,
Michal Kozubek,
Sharib Ali,
Anubha Gupta,
Jan Kybic,
Alison Noble,
Carlos Ortiz de Solórzano,
Samiksha Pachade,
Caroline Petitjean,
Daniel Sage,
Donglai Wei,
Elizabeth Wilden,
Deepak Alapatt,
Vincent Andrearczyk,
Ujjwal Baid,
Spyridon Bakas,
Niranjan Balu,
Sophia Bano
, et al. (331 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
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,…
▽ More
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.
△ Less
Submitted 12 September, 2023; v1 submitted 16 December, 2022;
originally announced December 2022.
SciPy 1.0--Fundamental Algorithms for Scientific Computing in Python
Authors:
Pauli Virtanen,
Ralf Gommers,
Travis E. Oliphant,
Matt Haberland,
Tyler Reddy,
David Cournapeau,
Evgeni Burovski,
Pearu Peterson,
Warren Weckesser,
Jonathan Bright,
Stéfan J. van der Walt,
Matthew Brett,
Joshua Wilson,
K. Jarrod Millman,
Nikolay Mayorov,
Andrew R. J. Nelson,
Eric Jones,
Robert Kern,
Eric Larson,
CJ Carey,
İlhan Polat,
Yu Feng,
Eric W. Moore,
Jake VanderPlas,
Denis Laxalde
, et al. (10 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
SciPy is an open source scientific computing library for the Python programming language. SciPy 1.0 was released in late 2017, about 16 years after the original version 0.1 release. SciPy has become a de facto standard for leveraging scientific algorithms in the Python programming language, with more than 600 unique code contributors, thousands of dependent packages, over 100,000 dependent reposit…
▽ More
SciPy is an open source scientific computing library for the Python programming language. SciPy 1.0 was released in late 2017, about 16 years after the original version 0.1 release. SciPy has become a de facto standard for leveraging scientific algorithms in the Python programming language, with more than 600 unique code contributors, thousands of dependent packages, over 100,000 dependent repositories, and millions of downloads per year. This includes usage of SciPy in almost half of all machine learning projects on GitHub, and usage by high profile projects including LIGO gravitational wave analysis and creation of the first-ever image of a black hole (M87). The library includes functionality spanning clustering, Fourier transforms, integration, interpolation, file I/O, linear algebra, image processing, orthogonal distance regression, minimization algorithms, signal processing, sparse matrix handling, computational geometry, and statistics. In this work, we provide an overview of the capabilities and development practices of the SciPy library and highlight some recent technical developments.
△ Less
Submitted 23 July, 2019;
originally announced July 2019.
