Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Deep learning shows promise for breast cancer diagnosis, but limited interpretability hinders clinical adoption. We benchmark ten ImageNet-pretrained models (ResNet50, VGG19, InceptionV3, DenseNet121, Xception, MobileNetV2, EfficientNet, ConvNeXt, ViT, and Swin Transformer) for benign-versus-malignant classification on the BreakHis histopathology dataset using a patient-level split, and explain their predictions with Grad-CAM, LIME, Integrated Gradients, and LRP. DenseNet121 performed best, with 99.4% test accuracy and an AUC-ROC of 0.999, and significantly outperformed all other models (p < 0.001). Transformer-based models trailed the CNNs. The explanations consistently highlighted nuclei-rich and glandular regions of diagnostic relevance. Combining transfer learning with explainable AI can thus yield accurate, interpretable tools for breast cancer diagnosis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alnawali et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: