The number of international benchmarking competitions is steadily increasing in various fields of machine learning (ML) research and practice. So far, however, little is known about the common practice as well as bottlenecks faced by the community in tackling the research questions posed. To shed light on the status quo of algorithm development in the specific field of biomedical imaging analysis, we designed an international survey that was issued to all participants of challenges conducted in conjunction with the IEEE ISBI 2021 and MICCAI 2021 conferences (80 competitions in total). The survey covered participants' expertise and working environments, their chosen strategies, as well as algorithm characteristics. A median of 72% challenge participants took part in the survey. According to our results, knowledge exchange was the primary incentive (70%) for participation, while the reception of prize money played only a minor role (16%). While a median of 80 working hours was spent on method development, a large portion of participants stated that they did not have enough time for method development (32%). 25% perceived the infrastructure to be a bottleneck. Overall, 94% of all solutions were deep learning-based. Of these, 84% were based on standard architectures. 43% of the respondents reported that the data samples (e.g., images) were too large to be processed at once. This was most commonly addressed by patch-based training (69%), downsampling (37%), and solving 3D analysis tasks as a series of 2D tasks. K-fold cross-validation on the training set was performed by only 37% of the participants and only 50% of the participants performed ensembling based on multiple identical models (61%) or heterogeneous models (39%). 48% of the respondents applied postprocessing steps.
翻译:在机器学习(ML)研究和实践的各个领域,国际基准竞赛的数量在稳步增加。然而,迄今为止,对于社区在处理提出的研究问题时面临的常见做法和瓶颈,人们很少知道社区面临的瓶颈和障碍。为了说明生物医学成像分析具体领域的算法发展现状,我们设计了一项国际调查,向所有参与者分发了与IEEEE ISBI 2021和MICCAI 2021会议(总共80次竞争)一起开展的挑战挑战调查,调查涉及参与者的专长和工作环境、他们选择的战略以及算法特点。调查涉及72%的参与者参加了调查。根据我们的结果,知识交流是参与的主要动力(70%),而接受奖赏金的作用只是很小(16%),虽然在方法开发方面花费了80个工作小时的中位,但大部分参与者表示他们没有足够的时间进行方法开发(32%) 。25%认为基础设施是瓶颈(基于深度学习,总体而言,94%的解决方案基于深度学习。其中,84%是根据标准结构进行的,对50个参与者进行了分析,其中44%的样本为45 %。 通常的参与者进行了这样的解算。