cs.CVJul 22, 2026

Self-supervision drives representational convergence in medical foundation models more than clinical supervision

Authors: Soroosh Tayebi ArastehSebastian ZiegelmayerMahshad LotfiniaLisa AdamsSven NebelungJakob Nikolas KatherDaniel Truhn

Organizations: Lab for AI in Medicine, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany · Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany · Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, TUM University Clinic, School of Medicine and Health, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany · Pattern Recognition Lab, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany · Else Kroener Fresenius Center for Digital Health, Technical University Dresden, Dresden, Germany. · Department of Medicine I, University Hospital Dresden, Dresden, Germany. · National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.

Abstract

Medical image encoders from different groups are increasingly treated as interchangeable, on the assumption that scale and clinical supervision concentrate their representations onto a shared structure. Whether this convergence is real, what produces it, and whether it is clinically usable are untested, and the similarity measures behind such claims are fragile. We present a controlled dissection across 18 image and 7 text encoders, all open-weight and run locally, spanning 7M to 27B parameters and five imaging modalities, including 650,982 chest radiographs from six datasets. To isolate cause, we train encoders that vary only the objective under fixed data, architecture, and scale, and reproduce the effect in a synthetic model. Convergence is modest but above a random floor, driven by the self-supervised objective, not clinical supervision: matched self-supervised encoders aligned most (40.4% on chest radiography), with label-supervised (21.1%) and image-text (3.3%) far lower, and did not grow with size (Spearman 0.302, p=0.223) or capability. It is within-modality, does not reach clinical language, and does not reproduce how radiologists judge case similarity. Yet a linear classifier transfers across encoders and to five held-out hospitals, retaining about 85% of within-encoder performance. Convergence in medical imaging is therefore set by the pretraining objective, not inherited from scale or clinical supervision. Interoperability is accordingly something to design for through that objective, and to validate where the shared geometry is weakest, across patient subgroups and against clinical judgment.

Explore similar work

CardsList