eess.IVMar 12, 2026

Deep Learning-based Assessment of the Relation Between the Third Molar and Mandibular Canal on Panoramic Radiographs using Local, Centralized, and Federated Learning

Authors: Johan Andreas Balle Rubak, Sara Haghighat, Sanyam Jain, Mostafa Aldesoki, Akhilanand Chaurasia, Sarah Sadat Ehsani, Faezeh Dehghan Ghanatkaman, Ahmad Badruddin Ghazali, +4 more

Organizations: Department of Dentistry and Oral Health, Aarhus University, Vennelyst Boulevard 9, Aarhus, 8000, Denmark · Private Dental Practice Dr. Jörg Deike, Hannover, Germany · Department of Oral Medicine and Radiology, King George's Medical University, India. Shah Mina Road, Chowk, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh 226003, India · Department of Diagnosis and Oral Health, University of Louisville School of Dentistry, Louisville, KY , 40202, USA · Faculty of Dentistry, Islamic Azad University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran · Department of Oral Maxillofacial Surgery & Oral Diagnosis, Kulliyyah of Dentistry, International Islamic University Malaysia · Department of Oral Radiology & Digital Dentistry, Academic Centre for Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA), University of Amsterdam and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Gustav Mahlerlaan 3004, 1081 Amsterdam, The Netherlands · Private Practice, Stockholm, Sweden · Melbourne Dental School, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Abstract

Impaction of the mandibular third molar in proximity to the mandibular canal increases the risk of inferior alveolar nerve injury. Panoramic radiography is routinely used to assess this relationship. Automated classification of molar-canal overlap could support clinical triage and reduce unnecessary CBCT referrals, while federated learning (FL) enables multi-center collaboration without sharing patient data. We compared Local Learning (LL), FL, and Centralized Learning (CL) for binary overlap/no-overlap classification on cropped panoramic radiographs partitioned across eight independent labelers. A pretrained ResNet-34 was trained under each paradigm and evaluated using per-client metrics with locally optimized thresholds and pooled test performance with a global threshold. Performance was assessed using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and threshold-based metrics, alongside training dynamics, Grad-CAM visualizations, and server-side aggregate monitoring signals. On the test set, CL achieved the highest performance (AUC 0.831; accuracy = 0.782), FL showed intermediate performance (AUC 0.757; accuracy = 0.703), and LL generalized poorly across clients (AUC range = 0.619-0.734; mean = 0.672). Training curves suggested overfitting, particularly in LL models, and Grad-CAM indicated more anatomically focused attention in CL and FL. Overall, centralized training provided the strongest performance, while FL offers a privacy-preserving alternative that outperforms LL.

Explore similar work

CardsList
  1. Overcoming data scarcity through multi-center federated learning for organs-at-risk segmentation in pediatric upper abdominal radiotherapy

    May 7, 2026Mianyong Ding, Maximilian Knoll, Semi Harrabi +7Medical Image SegmentationOncology

  2. Patient-Level, Leakage-Aware Deep Learning for Cross-Center Periapical Radiograph Classification

    Sep 13, 2026Md Jubaer Rahman, Ulas BagciMedical Image ClassificationMedical Image Benchmarks

  3. FedDRAW: Federated Dual Reputation Annealing Weighting for Heterogeneous Multi-Institutional Chest Radiograph Classification

    Sep 4, 2026Maryam Moradpour, Anne-Christin HauschildFederated Learning AggregationHeterogeneous Federated Learning