Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Training-free methods detect label inconsistencies in multi-label chest X-rays, indicating a need for dataset auditing.
Large-scale chest X-ray (CXR) datasets often rely on report-derived or weak labels, introducing missing and incorrect annotations that can degrade downstream models and limit trust. We study training-free mislabel detection in multi-label CXRs by scoring neighborhood label consistency in a fixed embedding space. Using the NIH Chest X-ray Kaggle sample (5606 CXRs), we extract intermediate CoAtNet features and obtain 64-dimensional embeddings with a frozen CoAtNet backbone and a lightweight refinement head. On top of these embeddings, we compare kNN consistency baselines with distance weighting and label-set similarity against LPV-DW-CS, clustered prototype voting weighted by distance and cluster support. We evaluate three synthetic label-noise regimes with review budgets matched to the corruption rate: random single-label (5% and 20%), boundary-noise (20% corruption within the lowest-density 20% subset), and disjoint-label replacement (20% within that subset). LPV-DW-CS yields the highest downstream macro-AUROC after filtering top-ranked samples (up to 0.8860), while kNN variants achieve higher Recall@budget at the same review rates (up to 99.44%). An image-only expert Likert review of top-ranked real samples finds substantial label-set inconsistencies (54.1% for LPV-DW-CS-280-A; 60.5% for KNN-DW-LSS), supporting neighborhood-consistency ranking as a practical, training-free tool for targeted dataset auditing.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gamboa et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: