Papers › Segmentation of Multiple Sclerosis Lesions across Hospitals: Learn Continually or...

Segmentation of Multiple Sclerosis Lesions across Hospitals: Learn Continually or Train from Scratch?

27 Oct 2022arXiv:2210.15091archive 2025-07-28

Enamundram Naga Karthik, Anne Kerbrat, Pierre Labauge, Tobias Granberg, Jason Talbott, Daniel S. Reich, Massimo Filippi, Rohit Bakshi, Virginie Callot, Sarath Chandar, Julien Cohen-Adad

Segmentation of Multiple Sclerosis (MS) lesions is a challenging problem. Several deep-learning-based methods have been proposed in recent years. However, most methods tend to be static, that is, a single model trained on a large, specialized dataset, which does not generalize well. Instead, the model should learn across datasets arriving sequentially from different hospitals by building upon the characteristics of lesions in a continual manner. In this regard, we explore experience replay, a well-known continual learning method, in the context of MS lesion segmentation across multi-contrast data from 8 different hospitals. Our experiments show that replay is able to achieve positive backward transfer and reduce catastrophic forgetting compared to sequential fine-tuning. Furthermore, replay outperforms the multi-domain training, thereby emerging as a promising solution for the segmentation of MS lesions. The code is available at this link: https://github.com/naga-karthik/continual-learning-ms

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; 0 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 9 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 naga-karthik/continual-learning-ms. “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