Complete Patient-Level Leakage Among Traceable Images in a Widely Used Brain Tumor MRI Benchmark

Abstract Reported accuracies on a widely used four-class brain tumor MRI benchmark routinely exceed 98%, but the released split discards patient identity. We content-matched tumor images to their figshare source and recovered identifiers for 4586 images from 233 patients. Of 906 tumor test images, 761 were traceable; every one belonged to a patient represented in training. Separately, 216 of 1311 test images were pixel-identical to training images. Removing duplicates did not reduce accuracy (99.22% to 99.42%), whereas five-fold patient-disjoint cross-validation yielded 95.19% overall and 93.68% on tumor classes. On the same 761 images, accuracy fell from 99.12% when the patient appeared in training to 93.60% when absent, increasing the error rate 7.3-fold. A matched random-fold control attributed 2.73 of the 4.03 percentage-point gap to patient grouping rather than the change in evaluation design; the class without patient identifiers changed negligibly despite relaxed proxy grouping. These results show that the released split measures recognition of additional slices from previously seen patients, not generalization to unseen patients. We release the recovered patient map, fixed folds, predictions, and analysis code.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Research Square
Published
2026-10-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-11078963/v1
Primary Topic
Brain Tumor Detection and Classification
Type
preprint
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
preprint

Complete Patient-Level Leakage Among Traceable Images in a Widely Used Brain Tumor MRI Benchmark

Jaiveer Singh Bassi
Research Square
Brain Tumor Detection and Classification
preprint

Complete Patient-Level Leakage Among Traceable Images in a Widely Used Brain Tumor MRI Benchmark

Jaiveer Singh Bassi
preprint en

Abstract

Abstract Reported accuracies on a widely used four-class brain tumor MRI benchmark routinely exceed 98%, but the released split discards patient identity. We content-matched tumor images to their figshare source and recovered identifiers for 4586 images from 233 patients. Of 906 tumor test images, 761 were traceable; every one belonged to a patient represented in training. Separately, 216 of 1311 test images were pixel-identical to training images. Removing duplicates did not reduce accuracy (99.22% to 99.42%), whereas five-fold patient-disjoint cross-validation yielded 95.19% overall and 93.68% on tumor classes. On the same 761 images, accuracy fell from 99.12% when the patient appeared in training to 93.60% when absent, increasing the error rate 7.3-fold. A matched random-fold control attributed 2.73 of the 4.03 percentage-point gap to patient grouping rather than the change in evaluation design; the class without patient identifiers changed negligibly despite relaxed proxy grouping. These results show that the released split measures recognition of additional slices from previously seen patients, not generalization to unseen patients. We release the recovered patient map, fixed folds, predictions, and analysis code.

Research Square
Good health and well-being
Brain Tumor Detection and Classification
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.