TL;DR
This study systematically compares model-side personalization and data-side harmonization in federated medical imaging, revealing their effectiveness depends on the nature of domain heterogeneity, and offers practical adaptation guidelines.
Contribution
It provides a comprehensive evaluation of state-of-the-art adaptation methods across diverse medical imaging tasks, highlighting when each approach is most effective.
Findings
Harmonization outperforms personalization in appearance-based domain shifts.
Personalization is more effective for structural differences.
Both strategies perform similarly when inter-client variation is limited.
Abstract
Federated learning enables collaborative model training across medical institutions without sharing raw data, but its performance is often limited by domain heterogeneity across clients. Existing approaches to address this challenge fall into two main paradigms: model-side personalization, which adapts model parameters to each client, and data-side harmonization, which reduces inter-client variation at the input level. Despite their widespread use, these strategies have not been systematically compared. In this work, we conduct a comprehensive study across six medical imaging settings-colon polyp, skin lesion, and breast tumor segmentation, and tuberculosis CXR, brain tumor, and breast tumor classification-covering diverse types of domain shift. We evaluate a broad set of state-of-the-art harmonization and personalization methods under a unified framework. Our results reveal a…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Code & Models
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
