Sonya Falahati

Morteza Alizadeh, Mehrdad Oveisi, Sonya Falahati et al.

Machine learning (ML) models rely heavily on consistent and accurate performance metrics to evaluate and compare their effectiveness. However, existing libraries often suffer from fragmentation, inconsistent implementations, and insufficient data validation protocols, leading to unreliable results. Existing libraries have often been developed independently and without adherence to a unified standard, particularly concerning the specific tasks they aim to support. As a result, each library tends to adopt its conventions for metric computation, input/output formatting, error handling, and data validation protocols. This lack of standardization leads to both implementation differences (ID) and reporting differences (RD), making it difficult to compare results across frameworks or ensure reliable evaluations. To address these issues, we introduce AllMetrics, an open-source unified Python library designed to standardize metric evaluation across diverse ML tasks, including regression, classification, clustering, segmentation, and image-to-image translation. The library implements class-specific reporting for multi-class tasks through configurable parameters to cover all use cases, while incorporating task-specific parameters to resolve metric computation discrepancies across implementations. Various datasets from domains like healthcare, finance, and real estate were applied to our library and compared with Python, Matlab, and R components to identify which yield similar results. AllMetrics combines a modular Application Programming Interface (API) with robust input validation mechanisms to ensure reproducibility and reliability in model evaluation. This paper presents the design principles, architectural components, and empirical analyses demonstrating the ability to mitigate evaluation errors and to enhance the trustworthiness of ML workflows.

Mohammad R. Salmanpour, Somayeh Sadat Mehrnia, Sajad Jabarzadeh Ghandilu et al.

Machine learning (ML), including deep learning (DL) and radiomics-based methods, is increasingly used for cancer outcome prediction with PET and SPECT imaging. However, the comparative performance of handcrafted radiomics features (HRF), deep radiomics features (DRF), DL models, and hybrid fusion approaches remains inconsistent across clinical applications. This systematic review analyzed 226 studies published from 2020 to 2025 that applied ML to PET or SPECT imaging for outcome prediction. Each study was evaluated using a 59-item framework covering dataset construction, feature extraction, validation methods, interpretability, and risk of bias. We extracted key details including model type, cancer site, imaging modality, and performance metrics such as accuracy and area under the curve (AUC). PET-based studies (95%) generally outperformed those using SPECT, likely due to higher spatial resolution and sensitivity. DRF models achieved the highest mean accuracy (0.862), while fusion models yielded the highest AUC (0.861). ANOVA confirmed significant differences in performance (accuracy: p=0.0006, AUC: p=0.0027). Common limitations included inadequate handling of class imbalance (59%), missing data (29%), and low population diversity (19%). Only 48% of studies adhered to IBSI standards. These findings highlight the need for standardized pipelines, improved data quality, and explainable AI to support clinical integration.

Mohammad R. Salmanpour, Sonya Falahati, Amir Hossein Pouria et al.

Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer mortality, with CT imaging central to screening, prognosis, and treatment. Manual segmentation is variable and time-intensive, while deep learning (DL) offers automation but faces barriers to clinical adoption. Guided by the Knowledge-to-Action framework, this study develops a clinician-in-the-loop DL pipeline to enhance reproducibility, prognostic accuracy, and clinical trust. Multi-center CT data from 999 patients across 12 public datasets were analyzed using five DL models (3D Attention U-Net, ResUNet, VNet, ReconNet, SAM-Med3D), benchmarked against expert contours on whole and click-point cropped images. Segmentation reproducibility was assessed using 497 PySERA-extracted radiomic features via Spearman correlation, ICC, Wilcoxon tests, and MANOVA, while prognostic modeling compared supervised (SL) and semi-supervised learning (SSL) across 38 dimensionality reduction strategies and 24 classifiers. Six physicians qualitatively evaluated masks across seven domains, including clinical meaningfulness, boundary quality, prognostic value, trust, and workflow integration. VNet achieved the best performance (Dice = 0.83, IoU = 0.71), radiomic stability (mean correlation = 0.76, ICC = 0.65), and predictive accuracy under SSL (accuracy = 0.88, F1 = 0.83). SSL consistently outperformed SL across models. Radiologists favored VNet for peritumoral representation and smoother boundaries, preferring AI-generated initial masks for refinement rather than replacement. These results demonstrate that integrating VNet with SSL yields accurate, reproducible, and clinically trusted CT-based lung cancer prognosis, highlighting a feasible path toward physician-centered AI translation.