Do Center Biases Propagate? Robustness of Pathology Foundation Models in Whole-Slide Image Classification

Pathology foundation models (PFMs) offer generalizable representations for whole-slide image (WSI) analysis, yet their clinical adoption remains limited. Specifically, their predictions lack reliable confidence estimates, and no single PFM is universally best across tasks, which severely undermines trust in medical settings. To overcome this, we propose $\mathtt{DICE}$, a plug-and-play framework that ensembles $K$ frozen PFMs and models their disagreement as a proxy for uncertainty estimation. To ensure this proxy yields meaningful estimates, we align the ensemble members via deep mutual learning, and theoretically show that this objective upper-bounds the model uncertainty. Additionally, we demonstrate that the ensemble's consensus localizes abnormalities at the patch level without any explicit supervision. We evaluate $\mathtt{DICE}$ on three challenging WSI benchmarks. Notably, our framework provides reliable uncertainty estimates that accurately flag failure-prone cases under in- and out-of-distribution settings, while matching or outperforming SOTA baselines in classification, calibration, and localization. Overall, $\mathtt{DICE}$ takes a crucial step toward translating PFMs into uncertainty-aware decision-support systems.

Pathology foundation models (FMs) produce powerful tile-level representations which remain sensitive to scanner and staining variability, undermining deployment across laboratories. We develop a novel fine-tuning recipe that improves the robustness of pathology FMs to acquisition factors. Applied to ten different FMs, our fine-tuning strategy consistently improves robustness for every model as well as downstream performance, with no observed trade-off. On average, it raises the PathoROB robustness index by 23% (from 0.72 to 0.87) and increases the overall cross-benchmark performance by 43% on Patho-Bench, HEST and THUNDER combined, with individual gains reaching up to 72% in robustness (Phikon-v2) and 76% in performance (Midnight-12k). We publicly release the fine-tuned versions of Phikon-v2 (Phaet) and Midnight-12k (Mascaret) at https://huggingface.co/wearewaiv/models.

Foundation Models (FMs) have recently redefined the state-of-the-art in histopathology by providing robust representations for whole-slide image (WSI) analysis. However, selecting the optimal foundation model (FM) for a specific clinical cohort currently requires multiple preprocessing steps, followed by computationally expensive feature extraction and the training of a Multiple Instance Learning (MIL) aggregator for every model. In this work, we investigate whether efficient tile-level linear probing can serve as a reliable proxy for slide-level performance, reducing the need to run full slide-level pipelines for every candidate encoder. We benchmark 19 state-of-the-art FMs on 42 slide-level and 16 tile-level tasks, comparing tile probing metrics against slide-level outcomes using ABMIL and Mean Pooling aggregations. We observe a high correlation between tile and slide performance across varying task difficulties, indicating that encoder representation quality is the primary determinant of WSI success. Sensitivity analyses show that transferability is stable across models and is more influenced by cohort sizes and numbers of tiles per slide than by average task difficulty. We also measure the agreement in best performing models between tile and slide-level tasks, showing tile benchmarks reliably shortlist strong candidates. Overall, our study indicates that tile-level benchmarking provides an efficient and practical first step for narrowing down candidate models, while slide-level evaluation remains essential for final validation on clinical tasks.