September 2017
Volume 17, Issue 10
Open Access
Vision Sciences Society Annual Meeting Abstract  |   August 2017
"Deep" Visual Patterns Are Informative to Practicing Radiologists in Mammograms in Diagnostic Tasks
Author Affiliations
  • Jennevieve Sevilla
    Brain and Behavior Discovery Institute
    James and Jean Culver Vision Discovery Institute, Augusta University, Augusta, GA
  • Jay Hegde
    Brain and Behavior Discovery Institute
    James and Jean Culver Vision Discovery Institute, Augusta University, Augusta, GA
Journal of Vision August 2017, Vol.17, 90. doi:10.1167/17.10.90
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Jennevieve Sevilla, Jay Hegde; "Deep" Visual Patterns Are Informative to Practicing Radiologists in Mammograms in Diagnostic Tasks. Journal of Vision 2017;17(10):90. doi: 10.1167/17.10.90.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

"Deep Learning" is a form of perceptual learning in which the trainee learns to perform a given task by learning the informative, often abstract, statistical patterns in the data from a relatively large set of labeled examples. We have previously reported that, using deep learning, naïve, non-professional human observers can be trained to detect camouflaged objects in natural scenes, or anomalies in radiological images (Chen and Hegdé, Psychol Sci 2014; Hegdé, J Vis 2014). By systematically manipulating the deep visual patterns (e.g., principal components [PCs]) using image synthesis algorithms, we have identified the patterns that such non-professional 'experts' use in detecting cancers in screening mammograms. But it is not known whether or to what extent practicing radiologists can or do use the same patterns. To help address this issue, we tested practicing radiologists (N = 9; 3 mammography specialists) under comparable conditions. Briefly, either original mammograms or synthesized counterparts that were missing 0 to 2 of the previously characterized PCs were viewed ad libitum one per trial. Depending on the trial, subjects indicated whether the mammogram contained a cancer (detection task), or whether the image was original or synthesized (discrimination task). Subjects were unable to discriminate original vs. synthesized images when the latter contained all PCs (d' = 0.38, p > 0.05), indicating that the two sets of images were mutually perceptually metameric. In the detection task, the performance of the radiologists covaried with the cumulative eigenvalue of the PCs in the image and with that of the non-professional subjects (two-way ANCOVA, eigenvalue x training mode; p < 0.05 for both factors and interaction). Together, our results indicate that at least some of the visual patterns used by professionally trained radiologists are the same as that learned and used by non-professionals trained in the laboratory.

Meeting abstract presented at VSS 2017

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×