Learning to Select Like Humans: Explainable Active Learning for Medical Imaging

TL;DR

This paper introduces an explainability-guided active learning framework for medical imaging that combines uncertainty and attention alignment to select samples, improving data efficiency and interpretability.

Contribution

It proposes a novel dual-criterion sample selection method integrating uncertainty and spatial attention alignment for better active learning in medical imaging.

Findings

Outperforms random sampling on three medical datasets.

Achieves high accuracy with fewer labeled samples.

Enhances model focus on clinically relevant regions.

Abstract

Medical image analysis requires substantial labeled data for model training, yet expert annotation is expensive and time-consuming. Active learning (AL) addresses this challenge by strategically selecting the most informative samples for the annotation purpose, but traditional methods solely rely on predictive uncertainty while ignoring whether models learn from clinically meaningful features a critical requirement for clinical deployment. We propose an explainability-guided active learning framework that integrates spatial attention alignment into a sample acquisition process. Our approach advocates for a dual-criterion selection strategy combining: (i) classification uncertainty to identify informative examples, and (ii) attention misalignment with radiologist-defined regions-of-interest (ROIs) to target samples where the model focuses on incorrect features. By measuring misalignment between Grad-CAM attention maps and expert annotations using Dice similarity, our acquisition function judiciously identifies samples that enhance both predictive performance and spatial interpretability. We evaluate the framework using three expert-annotated medical imaging datasets, namely, BraTS (MRI brain tumors), VinDr-CXR (chest X-rays), and SIIM-COVID-19 (chest X-rays). Using only 570 strategically selected samples, our explainability-guided approach consistently outperforms random sampling across all the datasets, achieving 77.22% accuracy on BraTS, 52.37% on VinDr-CXR, and 52.66% on SIIM-COVID. Grad-CAM visualizations confirm that the models trained by our dual-criterion selection focus on diagnostically relevant regions, demonstrating that incorporating explanation guidance into sample acquisition yields superior data efficiency while maintaining clinical interpretability.