{"record_type":"pith_number_record","schema_url":"https://pith.science/schemas/pith-number/v1.json","pith_number":"pith:2025:PXMZMNKWWAQQII7SAKYWKS55AX","short_pith_number":"pith:PXMZMNKW","schema_version":"1.0","canonical_sha256":"7dd9963556b0210423f202b1654bbd05e5a92fca6f22581e1d51ce38d69a53e5","source":{"kind":"arxiv","id":"2501.18055","version":2},"attestation_state":"computed","paper":{"title":"Current Pathology Foundation Models are unrobust to Medical Center Differences","license":"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":["cs.AI"],"primary_cat":"cs.LG","authors_text":"Edwin D. de Jong, Eric Marcus, Jonas Teuwen","submitted_at":"2025-01-29T23:38:14Z","abstract_excerpt":"Pathology Foundation Models (FMs) hold great promise for healthcare. Before they can be used in clinical practice, it is essential to ensure they are robust to variations between medical centers. We measure whether pathology FMs focus on biological features like tissue and cancer type, or on the well known confounding medical center signatures introduced by staining procedure and other differences. We introduce the Robustness Index. This novel robustness metric reflects to what degree biological features dominate confounding features. Ten current publicly available pathology FMs are evaluated."},"verification_status":{"content_addressed":true,"pith_receipt":true,"author_attested":false,"weak_author_claims":0,"strong_author_claims":0,"externally_anchored":false,"storage_verified":false,"citation_signatures":0,"replication_records":0,"graph_snapshot":true,"references_resolved":false,"formal_links_present":false},"canonical_record":{"source":{"id":"2501.18055","kind":"arxiv","version":2},"metadata":{"license":"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/","primary_cat":"cs.LG","submitted_at":"2025-01-29T23:38:14Z","cross_cats_sorted":["cs.AI"],"title_canon_sha256":"d8187214cd2b73b63d0c7e887475cf920c2312d870ed17df0bfac173f05e4f43","abstract_canon_sha256":"4bc867fcecb8abf39bff3ea9d3fc8c238c54f14672be60644034ed45964fd962"},"schema_version":"1.0"},"receipt":{"kind":"pith_receipt","key_id":"pith-v1-2026-05","algorithm":"ed25519","signed_at":"2026-07-05T10:08:29.095493Z","signature_b64":"zmY5U7iWjo/67T1qR1YZDQ7hrQmtVtnyiOYTIErcKWy9KZ3sWGsaLpURwRYqTxN0rcoSicnhm7BkHRFzv92pDg==","signed_message":"canonical_sha256_bytes","builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1","receipt_version":"0.3","canonical_sha256":"7dd9963556b0210423f202b1654bbd05e5a92fca6f22581e1d51ce38d69a53e5","last_reissued_at":"2026-07-05T10:08:29.095017Z","signature_status":"signed_v1","first_computed_at":"2026-07-05T10:08:29.095017Z","public_key_fingerprint":"8d4b5ee74e4693bcd1df2446408b0d54"},"graph_snapshot":{"paper":{"title":"Current Pathology Foundation Models are unrobust to Medical Center Differences","license":"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/","headline":"","cross_cats":["cs.AI"],"primary_cat":"cs.LG","authors_text":"Edwin D. de Jong, Eric Marcus, Jonas Teuwen","submitted_at":"2025-01-29T23:38:14Z","abstract_excerpt":"Pathology Foundation Models (FMs) hold great promise for healthcare. Before they can be used in clinical practice, it is essential to ensure they are robust to variations between medical centers. We measure whether pathology FMs focus on biological features like tissue and cancer type, or on the well known confounding medical center signatures introduced by staining procedure and other differences. We introduce the Robustness Index. This novel robustness metric reflects to what degree biological features dominate confounding features. Ten current publicly available pathology FMs are evaluated."},"claims":{"count":0,"items":[],"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"source":{"id":"2501.18055","kind":"arxiv","version":2},"verdict":{"id":null,"model_set":{},"created_at":null,"strongest_claim":"","one_line_summary":"","pipeline_version":null,"weakest_assumption":"","pith_extraction_headline":""},"integrity":{"clean":true,"summary":{"advisory":0,"critical":0,"by_detector":{},"informational":0},"endpoint":"/pith/2501.18055/integrity.json","findings":[],"available":true,"detectors_run":[],"snapshot_sha256":"c28c3603d3b5d939e8dc4c7e95fa8dfce3d595e45f758748cecf8e644a296938"},"references":{"count":0,"sample":[],"resolved_work":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57","internal_anchors":0},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"author_claims":{"count":0,"strong_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1"},"aliases":[{"alias_kind":"arxiv","alias_value":"2501.18055","created_at":"2026-07-05T10:08:29.095075+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"arxiv_version","alias_value":"2501.18055v2","created_at":"2026-07-05T10:08:29.095075+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"doi","alias_value":"10.48550/arxiv.2501.18055","created_at":"2026-07-05T10:08:29.095075+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_12","alias_value":"PXMZMNKWWAQQ","created_at":"2026-07-05T10:08:29.095075+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_16","alias_value":"PXMZMNKWWAQQII7S","created_at":"2026-07-05T10:08:29.095075+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_8","alias_value":"PXMZMNKW","created_at":"2026-07-05T10:08:29.095075+00:00"}],"events":[],"event_summary":{},"paper_claims":[],"inbound_citations":{"count":5,"internal_anchor_count":0,"sample":[{"citing_arxiv_id":"2606.19966","citing_title":"Semantic-Anchored Evidential Fusion for Domain-Robust Whole-Slide Survival Analysis","ref_index":22,"is_internal_anchor":false},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2606.28697","citing_title":"Mitigating Batch Effects in Histopathology via Language-Mediated Robust Embedding Generation","ref_index":16,"is_internal_anchor":false},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2605.31504","citing_title":"When Are Multimodal Predictions Biologically Supported? A Diagnostic Evaluation Framework","ref_index":8,"is_internal_anchor":false},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2510.23807","citing_title":"Beyond the Failures: Rethinking Foundation Models in Pathology","ref_index":6,"is_internal_anchor":false},{"citing_arxiv_id":"2602.22347","citing_title":"Enabling clinical use of foundation models for computational pathology","ref_index":22,"is_internal_anchor":false}]},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"sample":[],"anchors":[]},"links":{"html":"https://pith.science/pith/PXMZMNKWWAQQII7SAKYWKS55AX","json":"https://pith.science/pith/PXMZMNKWWAQQII7SAKYWKS55AX.json","graph_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/PXMZMNKWWAQQII7SAKYWKS55AX/graph.json","events_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/PXMZMNKWWAQQII7SAKYWKS55AX/events.json","paper":"https://pith.science/paper/PXMZMNKW"},"agent_actions":{"view_html":"https://pith.science/pith/PXMZMNKWWAQQII7SAKYWKS55AX","download_json":"https://pith.science/pith/PXMZMNKWWAQQII7SAKYWKS55AX.json","view_paper":"https://pith.science/paper/PXMZMNKW","resolve_alias":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/resolve?arxiv=2501.18055&json=true","fetch_graph":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/PXMZMNKWWAQQII7SAKYWKS55AX/graph.json","fetch_events":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/PXMZMNKWWAQQII7SAKYWKS55AX/events.json","actions":{"anchor_timestamp":"https://pith.science/pith/PXMZMNKWWAQQII7SAKYWKS55AX/action/timestamp_anchor","attest_storage":"https://pith.science/pith/PXMZMNKWWAQQII7SAKYWKS55AX/action/storage_attestation","attest_author":"https://pith.science/pith/PXMZMNKWWAQQII7SAKYWKS55AX/action/author_attestation","sign_citation":"https://pith.science/pith/PXMZMNKWWAQQII7SAKYWKS55AX/action/citation_signature","submit_replication":"https://pith.science/pith/PXMZMNKWWAQQII7SAKYWKS55AX/action/replication_record"}},"created_at":"2026-07-05T10:08:29.095075+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-05T10:08:29.095075+00:00"}