Can Multimodal Decision Models Classify Breast Ultrasound Images? Benchmarking CLEF and CLEF-Flash Across Prompts and Datasets
Authors: Tran Cao Minh, Hai Tran, Ha Minh Tan
Organizations: Research and Development Center, VNSO Technology JSC, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam · Department of Information Technology, Ho Chi Minh University of Education, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam · Faculty of Information Science and Engineering, University of Information Technology, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam · Vietnam National University, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
Multimodal decision models return probabilities over predefined alternatives, offering a structured interface for image classification. This study benchmarks inference with CLEF and CLEF-Flash on 2818 breast ultrasound images from Dataset B, BUSI, and BUS-BRA. Dataset B and BUS-BRA use binary benign-malignant classification, whereas BUSI includes normal, benign, and malignant categories. Model parameters remain unchanged, and original images are submitted without user-defined preprocessing. Three prompts provide minimal labels, an explicit classification task, or sonographic criteria. We report accuracy, macro F1, balanced accuracy, macro precision, throughput, and latency. CLEF-Flash with the clinical prompt achieves the highest accuracy on all three datasets: 74.85% on Dataset B, 66.28% on BUSI, and 51.63% on BUS-BRA. On BUSI, however, CLEF with the task-guided prompt achieves the highest macro F1 (64.51%) and balanced accuracy (68.72%). CLEF-Flash has lower latency in every matched comparison. Clinical instructions improve CLEF-Flash accuracy relative to the minimal prompt but reduce CLEF accuracy on all datasets. Confusion matrices reveal frequent benign-to-malignant errors, particularly on BUS-BRA, where all configurations fall below the 67.63% accuracy of a majority-class predictor. These findings demonstrate dataset-and prompt-dependent performance and motivate class-specific evaluation before applying multimodal decision models to breast ultrasound analysis.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Conceptual comparison between conventional large language or vision language models and decision models. Generative models produce open ended outputs, whereas decision models operate over a predefined decision schema and return structured probabilities for bounded alternatives.
Figure 2: Architecture of the CLEF decision models applied to breast ultrasound classification. The image is encoded by the backbone’s vision encoder, while the state and the typed decision schema are serialized as text. The multimodal backbone, held fixed during evaluation, performs a single prefill-only pass, and the joint schema head routes evidence from the input to each option, applies cross-field attention, and outputs one logit per admissible option. A per-question softmax yields the probability distribution over normal , benign and malignant . The panels show the respective backbones within the shared decision-model design. The three-class output illustrates BUSI; binary tasks use only benign and malignant options. Probabilities shown are illustrative.
Dataset
Normal
Benign
Malignant
Task
Dataset B
–
109
54
Binary
BUSI
133
437
210
Three class
BUS-BRA
–
1268
607
Binary
Table 1: Summary of the breast ultrasound datasets used in this study.
Prompt
Description
P1
Minimal classification instruction containing only the task and diagnostic alternatives.
P2
Task-guided instruction explaining the diagnostic classification task.
P3
Clinical knowledge guided instruction incorporating relevant sonographic characteristics such as lesion shape, margin, orientation, echogenicity, and posterior acoustic features.
Table 2: Prompting strategies evaluated in this study.
Figure 3: Overview of the inference and evaluation pipeline across datasets, models, and prompting strategies. The available diagnostic categories depend on the dataset, as specified in Table 1 .
Prompt
Model
Acc. (%)
F1 score (%)
Bal. Acc. (%)
Precision (%)
FPS
Latency (ms/image)
Dataset B
P1
CLEF
70.55
68.76
70.51
68.54
0.125
7971.36
CLEF-Flash
73.62
71.74
73.27
71.29
0.414
2415.63
P2
CLEF
65.03
64.12
67.31
65.35
0.126
7962.04
CLEF-Flash
73.01
71.37
73.28
71.04
0.430
2324.27
P3
CLEF
65.03
64.95
71.52
70.23
0.126
7959.96
Table 3: Classification performance and inference speed on Dataset B, BUSI, and BUS-BRA. Acc.: accuracy; Bal. Acc.: balanced accuracy. F1 score and precision are macro averages. FPS is reported in frames per second and latency in milliseconds per image. Bold indicates the best value for each metric within each dataset (higher is better except for latency).
Appendix figures & tables3 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure 1: Confusion matrices on Dataset B. Rows indicate reference labels and columns indicate predicted labels. The upper row shows CLEF-Flash and the lower row shows CLEF; columns correspond to P1, P2, and P3. Cell values are image counts.
Figure 2: Confusion matrices on BUSI. Rows indicate reference labels and columns indicate predicted labels. The upper row shows CLEF-Flash and the lower row shows CLEF; columns correspond to P1, P2, and P3. Cell values are image counts.
Figure 3: Confusion matrices on BUS-BRA. Rows indicate reference labels and columns indicate predicted labels. The upper row shows CLEF-Flash and the lower row shows CLEF; columns correspond to P1, P2, and P3. Cell values are image counts.
Breast fibroadenoma (FA) and phyllodes tumor (PT) are fibroepithelial breast lesions with highly overlapping appearances on B-mode ultrasound, making benign and borderline PT prone to being misclassified as FA and complicating preoperative decision-making. Existing computer-aided diagnosis methods commonly rely on single-modal imaging features and insufficiently exploit complementary clinical and textual information. To address this limitation, we construct the FAPT-M Dataset, a pathology-confirmed multimodal dataset comprising 910 patients with strictly reviewed ultrasound images, structured clinical attributes, and ultrasound diagnostic descriptions. Based on this dataset, we propose a clinically guided multimodal framework that integrates DenseNet-based visual encoding, CLIP-inspired text encoding, and lightweight clinical encoding, and further introduces clinical-conditioned adaptive modulation, cross-modal Transformer fusion, and dual-path representation learning to improve feature alignment and multimodal interaction. Under patient-level five-fold cross-validation, the proposed method achieves an accuracy of 77.64%, F1-score of 73.38%, and AUC of 89.74%, outperforming representative CNN-, Transformer-, and vision-language-based baselines. Ablation studies and class-balanced evaluations further confirm the contribution of three-modality fusion and the key architectural components. Overall, this work provides an effective multimodal approach for fine-grained FA-PT classification and establishes a high-quality benchmark for multimodal breast ultrasound analysis.
Chuxi Nan, Di Wu, Hongming Guo +4
School of Integrated Circuits, Wuxi Vocational College of Science and Technology · School of Advanced Technology, Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University · Shanghai Gem Science and Technology Co., Ltd. +2
Ultrasound interpretation requires both precise lesion localization and holistic clinical reasoning, yet existing methods typically excel at only one of these capabilities: specialized detectors offer strong localization but limited reasoning, whereas multimodal large language models (MLLMs) provide flexible reasoning but weak grounding in specialized medical domains. We present Echo-α, an agentic multimodal reasoning model for ultrasound interpretation that unifies these strengths within an invoke-and-reason framework. Echo-α is trained to coordinate organ-specific detector outputs, integrate them with global visual context, and convert the resulting evidence into grounded diagnostic decisions beyond detector-only inference. This behavior is established through a nine-task supervised curriculum and then refined by sequential reinforcement learning under different reward trade-offs, yielding Echo-α-Grounding for lesion anchoring and Echo-α-Diagnosis for final diagnosis. On multi-center renal and breast ultrasound benchmarks, Echo-α outperforms competitive baselines on both grounding and diagnosis. In particular, on cross-center test sets, Echo-α-Grounding attains 56.73%/43.78% [email protected] and Echo- α-Diagnosis reaches 74.90%/49.20% overall accuracy on renal/breast ultrasound. These results suggest that agentic multimodal reasoning can turn specialized detectors into verifiable clinical evidence, offering a practical route toward ultrasound AI systems that are more accurate, interpretable, and transferable. The repository is at https://github.com/MiliLab/Echo-Alpha.
Jing Zhang, Wentao Jiang, Tao Huang +8
School of Computer Science, Wuhan University, China · The Central Hospital of Wuhan, China · Taizhou Hospital of Zhejiang Province, China +1
Purpose: To evaluate the performance-feasibility tradeoffs of foundation models (FMs) and task-specific convolutional neural networks (CNNs) trained from scratch for breast implant classification in 2D mammography, with emphasis on suitability for near real-time clinical deployment. Methods: We evaluated four models: two FMs (RAD-DINO and MammoCLIP) and two CNNs trained from scratch for implant prediction (ResNet18 and our lightweight ResNetLite). Using the Emory Breast Imaging Dataset, 5,000 unilateral screening mammograms were used for training/validation and 1,000 manually reviewed unilateral images were held out for testing. For the FMs, global image embeddings from the pretrained encoder were classified using a support vector machine (SVM). The CNNs were trained end-to-end on 2D mammograms, with ResNetLite optimized via grid search over depth and width to balance accuracy and efficiency. Performance was evaluated using AUROC, sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, embedding visualization, and inference-latency. Results: All models demonstrated strong performance on held-out test data (n = 1,000). MammoCLIP achieved the highest AUROC (0.999) with the quickest training time of 493 seconds. RAD-DINO achieved the highest sensitivity (0.980; accuracy 0.989) but had the slowest inference and training times. ResNet18 and MammoCLIP achieved comparable accuracy (0.985). ResNetLite showed no statistically significant difference from ResNet18 (AUROC 0.993; accuracy 0.976) despite using only 1.4% of ResNet18's parameters, and had the fastest inference time. Conclusion: FMs and task-specific CNN models reliably detect breast implants on 2D mammography. Model selection is best guided by deployment context: MammoCLIP for GPU-equipped hospital settings requiring scalable integration, and lightweight CNNs such as ResNetLite for resource-constrained or edge deployments.
Vasisht Ishwar, Hari Trivedi, Young Seok Jeon +5
Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA · University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA