SMILE: Self-Explainable Multimodal Information Bottleneck for Medical Diagnosis
Authors: Yuqing Yang, Alexander Schmatz, Zhaozhao Ma, Changkyu Choi, Robert Jenssen, Shujian Yu
Organizations: Independent Researcher · Leiden Institute of Advanced Computer Science (LIACS), Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands · Quantitative Data Analytics Group, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands · School of Applied and Creative Computing, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA · Department of Informatics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway · Machine Learning Group, UiT — The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway
Explainability is increasingly seen as a crucial requirement in AI-based medical diagnosis, particularly in safety-critical clinical decision-making. Most existing explainability methods in healthcare operate in a post-hoc manner and are predominantly designed for unimodal data, which limits their applicability in increasingly prevalent multimodal diagnostic settings. This paper addresses the problem of self-explainable multimodal diagnosis by formulating it within the information bottleneck (IB) framework. We propose a unified learning paradigm that jointly optimizes predictive performance and modality-specific explainability by identifying the most informative elements inside each modality that contribute to diagnostic decisions. To enable tractable and stable optimization, we employ a matrix-based Renyi's α-order entropy functional under the assumption of sufficiently expressive encoders. Extensive experiments on representative medical datasets spanning heterogeneous modalities demonstrate that the proposed method consistently achieves strong diagnostic performance, including an absolute accuracy improvement of 9.1 percentage points on the iCTCF dataset. Moreover, the learned explanations provide transparent and modality-aware insights into feature relevance, thereby improving both the explainability and generalization.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Overview of the proposed SMILE framework. We design a modality-specific explainer to identify the top- k most informative features within each modality that influence diagnostic decisions. All selected features {Em}m=1M serve as the final explanations and are directly used for prediction, ensuring consistency between the explanations and the model decisions.
Figure 2: A 2D toy example illustrating how minimizing mutual information I(X;X~) and entropy H(X~) aids in feature selection.
Major Depressive Disorder: 1300 / Healthy Controls: 1128 (830 / 771 after QC)
Table 1: Dataset characteristics. Note that we use a prognosis task for iCTCF rather than a diagnostic task to identify infection, to better showcase explanations.
BRCA
ROSMAP
Method
ACC
WeightedF1
MacroF1
ACC
F1
AUC
DIABLO [ 55 ]
64.2 ± 0.9
53.4 ± 1.7
36.9 ± 1.7
74.2 ± 2.4
75.5 ± 2.5
83.0 ± 2.5
MOGONET [ 10 ]
82.9 ± 1.8
82.5 ± 1.7
77.4 ± 1.7
81.5 ± 2.3
82.1 ± 1.2
87.4 ± 1.2
TMC [ 56 ]
84.2 ± 0.5
84.4 ± 0.9
80.6 ± 0.9
82.5 ± 0.9
82.3 ± 0.6
88.5 ± 0.6
Dynamic [ 11 ]
87.1 ± 0.5
87.4 ± 0.6
83.5 ± 0.5
81.7 ± 1.5
82.3 ± 1.5
90.0 ± 1.2
DMIB [ 12 ]
86.0 ± 0.7
86.0 ± 0.8
81.6 ± 0.9
84.9 ± 1.8
85.3 ± 1.7
91.6 ± 0.7
Table 2: Performance of various multimodal methods on BRCA and ROSMAP datasets. The best results are in bold, and the second-best results are underlined.
ACC
AUC
JW 0.5
JW 0.6
De-COVID19-Net [ 57 ]
72.4
77.3
69.8
69.2
HoFN+SCResNet [ 58 ]
68.4
80.2
70.1
71.6
HUST-19 [ 50 ]
83.3
92.1
–
–
DMIB [ 12 ]
73.2
82.3
72.1
71.7
SMILE (ours)
92.4 ± 0.5
95.6 ± 0.6
84.3 ± 0.5
82.2 ± 0.3
Table 3: Performance of various multimodal methods on iCTCF dataset. SMILE results are reported as the mean and standard deviation across 10 runs of 5-fold cross-validation.
ACC
F1-score
AUC
MCC
DER [ 59 ]
56.3
41.3
66.8
17.4
MoNIG [ 60 ]
63.6
64.8
67.9
27.0
MIB [ 32 ]
55.9
70.1
77.7
21.3
MEIB [ 61 ]
52.2
68.5
82.2
6.7
SMILE (ours)
67.4 ± 2.3
69.7 ± 2.6
73.5 ± 3.6
35.0 ± 4.6
Table 4: Performance comparison of various multimodal methods on the REST-meta-MDD dataset (%). Best results are highlighted in bold. Our proposed SMILE achieves compelling performance in terms of all four metrics.
DuelRes
DuelRes (SMILE)
Res-DEN
Res-DEN (SMILE)
Kappa
65.4 ± 1.2
69.2 ± 0.8
70.1 ± 0.5
72.4 ± 0.5
Table 5: Performance of different strategies on Glaucoma Grading dataset. To compare directly with pre-trained models used for the classification task [ 51 ] , we use them as encoders.
Figure 4: The top-5 biomarkers among the k=30 features selected by SMILE are shown for two datasets (top row: BRCA ; bottom row: ROSMAP ) across three modalities: (a) mRNA expression, (b) DNA methylation, and (c) miRNA expression.
Figure 5: iCTCF visualizations on two modalities. (a) Qualitative examples of CT scan in the 2D montage: each explanation contains k=30 patches. The left rows present severe patients’ samples; the right rows present mild patients’ samples. (b) Qualitative examples of clinical information: normalized results from 150 test samples, k=20 features selected.
Figure 6: Glaucoma Grading visualizations on two modalities. (a) Qualitative examples of color fundus ( k=100 ); (b) Qualitative examples of OCT slices ( k=100 )
Figure 7: REST-meta-MDD biomarker visualizations on two modalities. (a) HC ( k=25 ); (b) MDD ( k=25 ). Top: sMRI subvolumes on axial slices. Bottom left: selected rs-fMRI edges on the cortical surface, nodes colored by AAL-116 ROI. Bottom right: circular connectome of the same edges with ROI labels. Color encodes selection frequency. Descriptive aggregates, not statistical comparisons; one run, whose posterior structural pattern recurred in 6 of 10 runs.
Figure 8: Qualitative examples of explanations generated by LIME, SHAP, and SMILE on different datasets. For CT scans in iCTCF dataset, we select k=30 with the patch size of 70×70 ; for OCT slices in Glaucoma Grading dataset, k=100 with the patch size of 4×4 .
Dataset
Fidelity (average confidence drop[%] ↓ )
Consistency (maximum sensitivity ↓ )
LIME
SHAP
SMILE
LIME
SHAP
SMILE
iCTCF
36.4 ± 2.1
48.1 ± 1.8
30.2 ± 0.9
0.48
0.37
0.22
Glaucoma
12.0 ± 0.8
15.1 ± 1.4
9.2 ± 0.6
0.39
0.41
0.27
Table 6: Comparison between built-in (ours) and post-hoc explanations. A lower value indicates better performance for metrics.
Dataset
Modality
w/o Xm
w/ Er
BRCA/ ROSMAP
mRNA
80.4 ± 1.1/78.6 ± 1.8
84.7 ± 1.9/82.3 ± 2.0
DNA meth
84.2 ± 0.7/81.2 ± 1.4
85.0 ± 1.5/81.8 ± 1.8
miRNA
83.9 ± 0.9/79.0 ± 1.5
84.3 ± 1.5/82.1 ± 1.7
mRNA+DNA meth
68.4 ± 1.4/63.7 ± 1.8
77.8 ± 4.2/75.4 ± 5.2
mRNA+miRNA
66.7 ± 1.8/61.5 ± 2.0
75.9 ± 4.7/71.1 ± 5.8
miRNA+DNA meth
71.4 ± 1.1/65.8 ± 1.3
79.6 ± 3.9/78.3 ± 4.9
Table 7: Ablation study results on different datasets. The modality mentioned refers to the object we operate on.
Appendix figures & tables2 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure 9: iCTCF visualizations on 2D HRCT montages. Panels (a) and (b) show representative severe and mild patients, respectively. The highlighted regions indicate the HRCT patches selected by SMILE as prognostic evidence.
Figure 10: Glaucoma Grading visualizations. Panels (a) and (b) show additional representative cases under the same multimodal setting. SMILE highlights selected regions on color fundus images and OCT slices, providing modality-specific evidence for glaucoma-grade prediction.
In recent years, AI systems in the medical domain have advanced significantly. However, despite outperforming humans, they are rarely used in practice since it is often not clear how they make their decisions. Optimal explanation and visualization of the decision process are often lacking. Therefore, we conducted a comparative user-centric analysis of the latest state-of-the-art textual, visual and multimodal explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) methods for medical image diagnosis. Our survey of 33 physicians showed that 88% agree that it is important that AI explains the diagnosis -- 64% even strongly agree. A combination of bounding box and report is rated better than the other tested XAI methods in the evaluated aspects understandability, completeness, speed, and applicability. We even tested the potential negative impact of false AI-based medical image diagnoses and found that 50% of the participants trusted false AI diagnoses over all tested XAI methods.
Julia Wagner, Tim Schlippe
IU International University of Applied Sciences, Germany
Dementia is a major and growing global health burden, with Alzheimer's disease (AD) accounting for most cases. Timely and accurate diagnosis is central to managing this burden and increasingly depends on integrating complementary clinical and imaging information. Multimodal deep learning can combine these modalities for AD diagnosis, but how its explanations behave across modalities, fusion strategies, and cohorts remains unclear. We developed an explainable multimodal framework pairing a 3D CNN encoder for T1-weighted MRI with a feedforward network for harmonized clinical and demographic data, comparing varied model setups on three-way and pairwise diagnostic tasks using 6,479 internal records from the ADNI and 1,703 independent records from the OASIS-3. On ADNI, the tabular-only model achieved the highest three-class AUC-ROC of 0.879 and best discriminated cognitively normal (CN) versus mild cognitive impairment (MCI; 0.903), while cross-attention performed best for MCI versus AD (0.861); CN versus AD was highly discriminative overall. On OASIS-3, the vision-only model performed best (three-class AUC-ROC 0.910); CN versus MCI remained difficult, and no fusion strategy consistently outperformed single modalities across tasks and cohorts. SHAP and Integrated Gradients identified the MMSE as the dominant tabular feature in both cohorts, with global feature rankings agreeing strongly in ADNI (ρ=0.94) and OASIS-3 (ρ=0.96); CAM-based explanations, however, changed with model configuration and cohort. These findings show that multimodal performance and explanations are task, modality, fusion, and cohort-dependent: a dominant cognitive signal persisted across cohorts, but feature contributions and CAM explanations did not, underscoring the need to evaluate explainability under cohort shift rather than as a stable, intrinsic property.
Yusuf Brima, Marcellin Atemkeng, Lakshmana Rao Namamula +1
Computer Vision, Institute of Cognitive Science, Osnabrück University, Germany. · Department of Mathematics, Rhodes University, South Africa. · National Institute for Theoretical and Computational Sciences (NITheCS), Stellenbosch, 7600, South Africa. +2
Multi-modal learning combining medical images and clinical text is promising for disease diagnosis. However, standard multi-modal training leads to shortcut learning: models exploit the easier modality (e.g., diagnostic cues in text) while neglecting harder-to-learn features (e.g., subtle visual patterns). We propose UniMod, a framework that mitigates shortcut learning by requiring each modality to predict the diagnosis on its own. It supervises image-only, text-only, and multi-modal classification simultaneously, so each modality must extract diagnostic features. We add cross-modality alignment for knowledge transfer and within-modality supervised contrastive alignment over same-diagnosis patients. On Harvard-Glaucoma, UniMod reaches 0.850 AUC, outperforming OGM-GE and Gradient Blending by 1.6-1.8%; on CheXpert Plus, it reaches 0.966 AUC, surpassing them by over 5%. UniMod also extends to 5-class multi-label diagnosis without architectural change, improving mean AUC by 0.097 over CGGM.
Zijian Gu, Weikai Lin, Shuang Zhou +2
University of Central Florida · Orlando, FL, United States · University of Rochester +5