Papers › Deep Weakly-Supervised Learning Methods for Classification and Localization in...
Deep Weakly-Supervised Learning Methods for Classification and Localization in Histology Images: A Survey
Jérôme Rony, Soufiane Belharbi, Jose Dolz, Ismail Ben Ayed, Luke McCaffrey, Eric Granger
Using deep learning models to diagnose cancer from histology data presents several challenges. Cancer grading and localization of regions of interest (ROIs) in these images normally relies on both image- and pixel-level labels, the latter requiring a costly annotation process. Deep weakly-supervised object localization (WSOL) methods provide different strategies for low-cost training of deep learning models. Using only image-class annotations, these methods can be trained to classify an image, and yield class activation maps (CAMs) for ROI localization. This paper provides a review of state-of-art DL methods for WSOL. We propose a taxonomy where these methods are divided into bottom-up and top-down methods according to the information flow in models. Although the latter have seen limited progress, recent bottom-up methods are currently driving much progress with deep WSOL methods. Early works focused on designing different spatial pooling functions. However, these methods reached limited localization accuracy, and unveiled a major limitation -- the under-activation of CAMs which leads to high false negative localization. Subsequent works aimed to alleviate this issue and recover complete object. Representative methods from our taxonomy are evaluated and compared in terms of classification and localization accuracy on two challenging histology datasets. Overall, the results indicate poor localization performance, particularly for generic methods that were initially designed to process natural images. Methods designed to address the challenges of histology data yielded good results. However, all methods suffer from high false positive/negative localization. Four key challenges are identified for the application of deep WSOL methods in histology -- under/over activation of CAMs, sensitivity to thresholding, and model selection.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="1909.03354")
Code
Syntology Ran 3 of 3 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 0 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 2 ran · honoured contract; 1 ran · violated contract.
By repository: official repository: 3 samples from 1 repository, 3 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
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
3 samples harvested; 3 ran; 2 honoured the contract we drafted; 0 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: 3 of the 3 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 jeromerony/survey_wsl_histology. “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.
a27e885ba8dd6335 · report
3b4e51bf444d4fa3 · report
f8308673051d4dd5 · report
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Methods
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