Papers › Benchmarking Embedding Aggregation Methods in Computational Pathology: A Clinical Data...

Benchmarking Embedding Aggregation Methods in Computational Pathology: A Clinical Data Perspective

10 Jul 2024arXiv:2407.07841archive 2025-07-28

Shengjia Chen, Gabriele Campanella, Abdulkadir Elmas, Aryeh Stock, Jennifer Zeng, Alexandros D. Polydorides, Adam J. Schoenfeld, Kuan-lin Huang, Jane Houldsworth, Chad Vanderbilt, Thomas J. Fuchs

Recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI), in particular self-supervised learning of foundation models (FMs), are revolutionizing medical imaging and computational pathology (CPath). A constant challenge in the analysis of digital Whole Slide Images (WSIs) is the problem of aggregating tens of thousands of tile-level image embeddings to a slide-level representation. Due to the prevalent use of datasets created for genomic research, such as TCGA, for method development, the performance of these techniques on diagnostic slides from clinical practice has been inadequately explored. This study conducts a thorough benchmarking analysis of ten slide-level aggregation techniques across nine clinically relevant tasks, including diagnostic assessment, biomarker classification, and outcome prediction. The results yield following key insights: (1) Embeddings derived from domain-specific (histological images) FMs outperform those from generic ImageNet-based models across aggregation methods. (2) Spatial-aware aggregators enhance the performance significantly when using ImageNet pre-trained models but not when using FMs. (3) No single model excels in all tasks and spatially-aware models do not show general superiority as it would be expected. These findings underscore the need for more adaptable and universally applicable aggregation techniques, guiding future research towards tools that better meet the evolving needs of clinical-AI in pathology. The code used in this work is available at \url{https://github.com/fuchs-lab-public/CPath_SABenchmark}.

Code

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

9 samples harvested; 4 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 5 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 0 of the 9 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from fuchs-lab-public/cpath_sabenchmark. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

Tasks

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections