中 EN
Sign In Register
×

Academic Intelligence · Curated Daily

Explore the Frontier of Global Academia

AcademicHub aggregates real-time literature from top journals and preprint platforms. Build your personal research radar and let large language models compile cross-disciplinary analysis briefings automatically.

Sign In Register
Authors: Szymanski ×
↻ Shuffle
01.
medRxiv (Medicine) 2026-06-24

An Automated, Pathologist-free Gleason Grade Stratifies Disease-free Interval Comparably to Expert Grading from a Single Out-of-distribution Slide

Authors:
Ebbert↗J. L↗Szymanski↗Perry↗Della Corte↗

Automated Gleason grading now matches expert pathologists on the cohorts where systems are developed and tuned, but deployment-relevant gaps remain: whether an automated grade, applied without site-specific tuning or pathologist oversight, stratifies outcome comparably to expert grading on slides from unseen institutions and in cross-specimen applications. We tested this for disease-free interval (DFI), a curated recurrence endpoint. A production gland-level prostate diagnostic (PathTools Prostate v11.0) was applied frozen and uncalibrated to 298 diagnostic whole-slide images from 274 TCGA-PRAD radical-prostatectomy patients, a cohort outside its development distribution and needle-core-biopsy training data, contributed by 25 source sites under heterogeneous digitization; tissue was detected automatically with no expert region annotation. From the output we derived an ISUP grade group and continuous high-grade content, and evaluated each grade as a standalone predictor of DFI (24 events) by Harrell's c-index with 95% bootstrap confidence intervals, a paired between-method bootstrap, and Kaplan-Meier curves with the log-rank test. The automated grade reproduced the clinical grade group at quadratic-weighted kappa = 0.62 (95% CI 0.53-0.70; 48% exact, 86% within one group), within the expert inter-observer range. As the sole predictor it stratified recurrence (log-rank p = 0.022; c-index 0.69, 95% CI 0.58-0.79), and the continuous high-grade fraction was robustly prognostic (hazard ratio 1.37 per SD, p = 0.029; c-index 0.71, 0.61-0.81). Standalone discrimination was not statistically separable from the clinical grade (c-index 0.78, 0.69-0.86; paired {triangleup} c-index spanning zero), and in a joint model the automated grade added nothing beyond it, consistent with both measuring a shared morphological axis. From a single out-of-distribution slide with no pathologist oversight, the automated grade provides standalone recurrence stratification not statistically separable from whole-gland expert grading, demonstrating robust generalizability beyond training data; reported as a continuous high-grade fraction, it offers reproducible, expert-free, grade-equivalent risk stratification for harmonizing large archival or genomically-profiled cohorts.

Read & Discuss → View Source →
02.
arXiv (CS.LG) 2026-06-12

Thermodynamic assessment of machine learning models for solid-state synthesis prediction

Authors:
Jane Schlesinger↗Simon Hjaltason↗Nathan J. Szymanski↗Christopher J. Bartel↗

arXiv:2602.04075v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Machine learning models have recently emerged to predict whether hypothetical solid-state materials can be synthesized. These models aim to circumvent direct first-principles modeling of solid-state phase transformations, instead learning from large databases of successfully synthesized materials. Here, we assess the alignment of several recently introduced synthesis prediction models with material and reaction thermodynamics, quantified by the energy with respect to the convex hull and a metric accounting for thermodynamic selectivity of enumerated synthesis reactions. A dataset of successful synthesis recipes was used to determine the likely bounds on both quantities beyond which materials can be deemed unlikely to be synthesized. With these bounds as context, thermodynamic quantities were computed using the CHGNet foundation potential for thousands of new hypothetical materials generated using the Chemeleon generative model. Four recently published machine learning models for synthesizability prediction were applied to this same dataset, and the resultant predictions were considered against computed thermodynamics. We find these models generally overpredict the likelihood of synthesis, but some model scores do trend with thermodynamic heuristics, assigning lower scores to materials that are less stable or do not have an available synthesis recipe that is calculated to be thermodynamically selective. In total, this work identifies existing gaps in machine learning models for materials synthesis and introduces a new approach to assess their quality in the absence of extensive negative examples (failed syntheses).

Read & Discuss → View Source →