Vision language models versus machine learning models performance on polyp detection and classification in colonoscopy images

Medical image analysis is central to clinical decision-making, and recent advances in vision–language models (VLMs) have introduced promising capabilities for jointly processing visual and textual data. This study evaluates zero-shot VLMs against convolutional neural networks (CNNs) and classical machine learning (CML) models for polyp detection (CADe) and classification (CADx) using 2,258 colonoscopy images from 428 patients with histopathological labels. We benchmarked 15 approaches including ResNet50, five CMLs (random forest, support vector machine, logistic regression, decision tree, Gaussian naive Bayes), two contrastive vision–language encoders (CLIP, BiomedCLIP), and seven frontier VLMs (GPT-4, GPT-4.1, GPT-4.1-mini, Gemma-3-27b, Qwen-2.5-vl-72b, Gemini-1.5-Pro, Claude-3-Opus). For polyp detection, the highest-performing VLMs (GPT-4.1 F1: 91.98%, GPT-4.1-mini F1: 91.16%) matched CNN performance (ResNet50 F1: 91.35%), though substantial variability existed across VLMs (F1 range: 19.37% to 91.98%). For classification, CNNs substantially outperformed VLMs: ResNet50 achieved weighted F1 of 74.94% versus 55.07% for GPT-4.1-mini, with performance gaps widening dramatically for rare polyp subtypes where VLMs often achieved 0% F1. External validation on 75 images showed that while ResNet50 performance declined substantially, some VLMs demonstrated more stable cross-institutional performance. These findings establish a task-dependent performance hierarchy where VLMs match CNNs for detection but remain limited for classification, suggesting distinct clinical roles for each approach.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Scientific Reports
Published
2025-11-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-29566-2
Citations
1
Primary Topic
COVID-19 diagnosis using AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.36
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Vision language models versus machine learning models performance on polyp detection and classification in colonoscopy images

Shabnam Shahrokh, Girish N. Nadkarni, Jamil S. Samaan, Nicholas A. Hoerter et al.
1 citations
Scientific Reports
COVID-19 diagnosis using AI
1.36
article

Vision language models versus machine learning models performance on polyp detection and classification in colonoscopy images

Shabnam Shahrokh, Girish N. Nadkarni, Jamil S. Samaan, Nicholas A. Hoerter, Pardis Ketabi Moghadam, Soltanali Fallah, Hamid Asadzadeh Aghdaei, Kaveh Kavousi, Narly Golestani, Nariman Naderi, Mohammad Khalafi, Seyed Amir Ahmad Safavi‐Naini, Nicholas P. Tatonetti, Dorsa Alijanzadeh, Ali Soroush, Ameneh Salehi
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Medical image analysis is central to clinical decision-making, and recent advances in vision–language models (VLMs) have introduced promising capabilities for jointly processing visual and textual data. This study evaluates zero-shot VLMs against convolutional neural networks (CNNs) and classical machine learning (CML) models for polyp detection (CADe) and classification (CADx) using 2,258 colonoscopy images from 428 patients with histopathological labels. We benchmarked 15 approaches including ResNet50, five CMLs (random forest, support vector machine, logistic regression, decision tree, Gaussian naive Bayes), two contrastive vision–language encoders (CLIP, BiomedCLIP), and seven frontier VLMs (GPT-4, GPT-4.1, GPT-4.1-mini, Gemma-3-27b, Qwen-2.5-vl-72b, Gemini-1.5-Pro, Claude-3-Opus). For polyp detection, the highest-performing VLMs (GPT-4.1 F1: 91.98%, GPT-4.1-mini F1: 91.16%) matched CNN performance (ResNet50 F1: 91.35%), though substantial variability existed across VLMs (F1 range: 19.37% to 91.98%). For classification, CNNs substantially outperformed VLMs: ResNet50 achieved weighted F1 of 74.94% versus 55.07% for GPT-4.1-mini, with performance gaps widening dramatically for rare polyp subtypes where VLMs often achieved 0% F1. External validation on 75 images showed that while ResNet50 performance declined substantially, some VLMs demonstrated more stable cross-institutional performance. These findings establish a task-dependent performance hierarchy where VLMs match CNNs for detection but remain limited for classification, suggesting distinct clinical roles for each approach.

Scientific ReportsVol. 15(1)
Cedars-Sinai Medical Center (US), University of Tehran (IR), Milad Hospital (IR), Research Institute for Endocrine Sciences (IR), Child Health and Development Institute (US), Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences (IR), Columbia University (US), Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 14%
COVID-19 diagnosis using AI
1.36
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.