Downloads · 30 days
0
cngvng/ct2rep-radgenome-ct-finetune
ct2rep-radgenome-ct-finetune is a machine learning model from cngvng. Use it for the machine learning task on the model card, and read the license before you ship it in a product.
Full training (from scratch, per the paper's own recipe) of a CT2Rep-architecture 3D CT report generator, trained on the RadGenome-ChestCT benchmark's train split (22,942 volumes), evaluated on its held-out test split…
Downloads · 30 days
0
Access
Public
Updated Aug 21, 2026
Repo size
1.8 GB
Likes
0
Public
Click a slice to open those files.
.pth1.8 GB · 100%
From the Hugging Face model README
Full training (from scratch, per the paper's own recipe) of a
CT2Rep-architecture 3D CT report generator, trained on the
RadGenome-ChestCT benchmark's train split (22,942 volumes), evaluated on
its held-out test split (1,564 volumes). 8 epochs (paper's own default is
100 -- reduced for feasibility on a single A100-40GB at
batch_size=1/240x480x480 input resolution).
Scored with this project's shared Clinical Efficacy + NLG metric suite
(src/metrics/report.py::MetricsReport) -- the same pipeline used for
every other baseline in this comparison.
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Clinical Efficacy F1 (macro) | 0.0000 |
| Clinical Efficacy F1 (micro) | 0.0000 |
| BLEU-1 | 0.4529 |
| BLEU-4 | 0.2773 |
| ROUGE-L | 0.3566 |
| METEOR | 0.4225 |
| CIDEr-D | 0.2927 |
| BERTScore F1 | 0.8904 |
Clinical Efficacy is exactly 0.0 across every metric. Direct inspection of the 1564 test predictions found only 3 unique generated reports across the entire test set (68.3% / 28.7% / 3.0% of cases), all "everything normal" boilerplate that never asserts any of the 18 CT-RATE abnormality categories. This is why Clinical Efficacy is exactly zero: the model never predicts a positive finding, so there are no true positives to score, regardless of the reference report's actual content.
The NLG scores above (BLEU/ROUGE/METEOR/CIDEr/BERTScore) look strong in isolation because RadGenome-ChestCT reference reports are themselves dominated by shared "normal finding" boilerplate sentences that a templated near-constant output happens to overlap with heavily -- this is exactly the reward-hacking pattern this project's own metric methodology (Clinical Efficacy reported alongside NLG, never NLG alone) is designed to catch. Do not cite the NLG numbers above as evidence of report-generation quality without this context.
Not yet root-caused (open follow-up, not this checkpoint's last word):
possible causes include the paper's own block_trigrams/beam-search decode
settings interacting poorly with this dataset's vocabulary distribution,
insufficient training epochs (8, vs. the paper's own 100) for the
vision-conditioning signal to overcome a strong "normal report" prior in
the training distribution, or a genuine architecture/training deviation
introduced during reproduction (see docs/baselines/ct2rep.md in the
source repository for the full deviation list and audit trail).
checkpoint_latest.pth -- final fine-tuned model state (epoch 8/8,
1.76GB).Per-epoch checkpoints (checkpoint_epoch1.pth through checkpoint_epoch7.pth)
and optimizer/scheduler resume state are intentionally not included here
(training-resume-only, not needed to use or reproduce this checkpoint's
outputs).