Analysis of Transferability Estimation Metrics for Surgical Phase Recognition

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2508.16730v1
• Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2025 18:05:33 GMT
• Title: Analysis of Transferability Estimation Metrics for Surgical Phase Recognition
• Authors: Prabhant Singh, Yiping Li, Yasmina Al Khalil,
• Abstract summary: Fine-tuning pre-trained models has become a cornerstone of modern machine learning, allowing practitioners to achieve high performance with limited labeled data.<n>In surgical video analysis, where expert annotations are especially time-consuming and costly, identifying the most suitable pre-trained model for a downstream task is both critical and challenging.<n>We provide the first comprehensive benchmark of three representative metrics, LogME, H-Score, and TransRate, on two diverse datasets.
• Score: 3.3285108719932555
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Fine-tuning pre-trained models has become a cornerstone of modern machine learning, allowing practitioners to achieve high performance with limited labeled data. In surgical video analysis, where expert annotations are especially time-consuming and costly, identifying the most suitable pre-trained model for a downstream task is both critical and challenging. Source-independent transferability estimation (SITE) offers a solution by predicting how well a model will fine-tune on target data using only its embeddings or outputs, without requiring full retraining. In this work, we formalize SITE for surgical phase recognition and provide the first comprehensive benchmark of three representative metrics, LogME, H-Score, and TransRate, on two diverse datasets (RAMIE and AutoLaparo). Our results show that LogME, particularly when aggregated by the minimum per-subset score, aligns most closely with fine-tuning accuracy; H-Score yields only weak predictive power; and TransRate often inverses true model rankings. Ablation studies show that when candidate models have similar performances, transferability estimates lose discriminative power, emphasizing the importance of maintaining model diversity or using additional validation. We conclude with practical guidelines for model selection and outline future directions toward domain-specific metrics, theoretical foundations, and interactive benchmarking tools.

Related papers

• Simplicity Prevails: The Emergence of Generalizable AIGI Detection in Visual Foundation Models [15.709482146201283]
  A simple linear classifier trained on the frozen features of modern Vision Foundation Models establishes a new state-of-the-art.<n>We show that this baseline matches specialized detectors on standard benchmarks but also decisively outperforms them on in-the-wild datasets.<n>We conclude by advocating for a paradigm shift in AI forensics, moving from overfitting on static benchmarks to harnessing the evolving world knowledge of foundation models for real-world reliability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-02T07:20:02Z)
• EEG Foundation Models: Progresses, Benchmarking, and Open Problems [10.447009984769819]
  We review 50 representative EEG foundation models and organize their design choices into a unified taxonomic framework.<n>We evaluate 12 open-source foundation models and competitive specialist baselines across 13 EEG datasets spanning nine BCI paradigms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-25T15:28:50Z)
• Beyond Model Ranking: Predictability-Aligned Evaluation for Time Series Forecasting [18.018179328110048]
  We introduce a predictability-aligned diagnostic framework grounded in spectral coherence.<n>We provide the first systematic evidence of "predictability drift", demonstrating that a task's forecasting difficulty varies sharply over time.<n>Our evaluation reveals a key architectural trade-off: complex models are superior for low-predictability data, whereas linear models are highly effective on more predictable tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-27T02:56:06Z)
• On Large-scale Evaluation of Embedding Models for Knowledge Graph Completion [1.2703808802607108]
  Knowledge graph embedding (KGE) models are extensively studied for knowledge graph completion.<n>Standard evaluation metrics rely on the closed-world assumption, which penalizes models for correctly predicting missing triples.<n>This paper conducts a comprehensive evaluation of four representative KGE models on large-scale datasets FB-CVT-REV and FB+CVT-REV.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-11T20:49:02Z)
• Model Utility Law: Evaluating LLMs beyond Performance through Mechanism Interpretable Metric [99.56567010306807]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have become indispensable across academia, industry, and daily applications.<n>One core challenge of evaluation in the large language model (LLM) era is the generalization issue.<n>We propose Model Utilization Index (MUI), a mechanism interpretability enhanced metric that complements traditional performance scores.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-10T04:09:47Z)
• Beyond Scaling: Measuring and Predicting the Upper Bound of Knowledge Retention in Language Model Pre-Training [51.41246396610475]
  This paper aims to predict performance in closed-book question answering (QA) without the help of external tools.<n>We conduct large-scale retrieval and semantic analysis across the pre-training corpora of 21 publicly available and 3 custom-trained large language models.<n>Building on these foundations, we propose Size-dependent Mutual Information (SMI), an information-theoretic metric that linearly correlates pre-training data characteristics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-06T13:23:53Z)
• What Do Learning Dynamics Reveal About Generalization in LLM Reasoning? [83.83230167222852]
  We find that a model's generalization behavior can be effectively characterized by a training metric we call pre-memorization train accuracy. By connecting a model's learning behavior to its generalization, pre-memorization train accuracy can guide targeted improvements to training strategies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-12T09:52:40Z)
• Weakly supervised deep learning model with size constraint for prostate cancer detection in multiparametric MRI and generalization to unseen domains [0.90668179713299]
  We show that the model achieves on-par performance with strong fully supervised baseline models. We also observe a performance decrease for both fully supervised and weakly supervised models when tested on unseen data domains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-04T12:24:33Z)
• QualEval: Qualitative Evaluation for Model Improvement [82.73561470966658]
  We propose QualEval, which augments quantitative scalar metrics with automated qualitative evaluation as a vehicle for model improvement. QualEval uses a powerful LLM reasoner and our novel flexible linear programming solver to generate human-readable insights. We demonstrate that leveraging its insights, for example, improves the absolute performance of the Llama 2 model by up to 15% points relative.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-06T00:21:44Z)
• How to Estimate Model Transferability of Pre-Trained Speech Models? [84.11085139766108]
  "Score-based assessment" framework for estimating transferability of pre-trained speech models. We leverage upon two representation theories, Bayesian likelihood estimation and optimal transport, to generate rank scores for the PSM candidates. Our framework efficiently computes transferability scores without actual fine-tuning of candidate models or layers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-01T04:52:26Z)
• Towards Estimating Transferability using Hard Subsets [25.86053764521497]
  We propose HASTE, a new strategy to estimate the transferability of a source model to a particular target task using only a harder subset of target data. We show that HASTE can be used with any existing transferability metric to improve their reliability. Our experimental results across multiple source model architectures, target datasets, and transfer learning tasks show that HASTE modified metrics are consistently better or on par with the state of the art transferability metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-17T14:50:18Z)
• Self-Distillation for Further Pre-training of Transformers [83.84227016847096]
  We propose self-distillation as a regularization for a further pre-training stage. We empirically validate the efficacy of self-distillation on a variety of benchmark datasets for image and text classification tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-30T02:25:12Z)
• CausalAgents: A Robustness Benchmark for Motion Forecasting using Causal Relationships [8.679073301435265]
  We construct a new benchmark for evaluating and improving model robustness by applying perturbations to existing data. We use these labels to perturb the data by deleting non-causal agents from the scene. Under non-causal perturbations, we observe a $25$-$38%$ relative change in minADE as compared to the original.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-07T21:28:23Z)
• HyperImpute: Generalized Iterative Imputation with Automatic Model Selection [77.86861638371926]
  We propose a generalized iterative imputation framework for adaptively and automatically configuring column-wise models. We provide a concrete implementation with out-of-the-box learners, simulators, and interfaces.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-15T19:10:35Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.