Papers › Benchmarking Pathology Foundation Models: Adaptation Strategies and Scenarios

Benchmarking Pathology Foundation Models: Adaptation Strategies and Scenarios

21 Oct 2024arXiv:2410.16038archive 2025-07-28

Jeaung Lee, Jeewoo Lim, Keunho Byeon, Jin Tae Kwak

In computational pathology, several foundation models have recently emerged and demonstrated enhanced learning capability for analyzing pathology images. However, adapting these models to various downstream tasks remains challenging, particularly when faced with datasets from different sources and acquisition conditions, as well as limited data availability. In this study, we benchmark four pathology-specific foundation models across 14 datasets and two scenarios-consistency assessment and flexibility assessment-addressing diverse adaptation scenarios and downstream tasks. In the consistency assessment scenario, involving five fine-tuning methods, we found that the parameter-efficient fine-tuning approach was both efficient and effective for adapting pathology-specific foundation models to diverse datasets within the same downstream task. In the flexibility assessment scenario under data-limited environments, utilizing five few-shot learning methods, we observed that the foundation models benefited more from the few-shot learning methods that involve modification during the testing phase only. These findings provide insights that could guide the deployment of pathology-specific foundation models in real clinical settings, potentially improving the accuracy and reliability of pathology image analysis. The code for this study is available at: https://github.com/QuIIL/BenchmarkingPathologyFoundationModels.

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

15 samples harvested; 2 ran; 1 honoured the contract we drafted; 13 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: 15 of the 15 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 quiil/benchmarkingpathologyfoundationmodels. “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