Effect of Patch Size on Fine-Tuning Vision Transformers in Two-Dimensional and Three-Dimensional Medical Image Classification
Abstract
Domain fit: AI-adjacent · Paper appears method- or tooling-adjacent to AI workflows with partial ecosystem coverage.
Vision Transformers (ViTs) and their variants have become state-of-the-art in many computer vision tasks and are widely used as backbones in large-scale vision and vision-language foundation models. While substantial research has focused on architectural improvements, the impact of patch size, a crucial initial design choice in ViTs, remains underexplored, particularly in medical domains where both two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) imaging modalities exist. In this study, using 12 medical imaging datasets from various imaging modalities (including seven 2D and five 3D datasets), we conduct a thorough evaluation of how different patch sizes affect ViT classification performance. Using a single graphical processing unit (GPU) and a range of patch sizes (1, 2, 4, 7, 14, 28), we fine-tune ViT models and observe consistent improvements in classification performance with smaller patch sizes (1, 2, and 4), which achieve the best results across nearly all datasets. More specifically, our results indicate improvements in balanced accuracy of up to 12.78% for 2D datasets (patch size 2 vs. 28) and up to 23.78% for 3D datasets (patch size 1 vs. 14), at the cost of increased computational expense. Moreover, by applying a straightforward ensemble strategy that fuses the predictions of the models trained with patch sizes 1, 2, and 4, we demonstrate a further boost in performance in most cases, especially for the 2D datasets. Our implementation is publicly available on GitHub: https://github.com/HealMaDe/MedViT
Results and benchmarks
Vision Transformers (ViTs) and their variants have become state-of-the-art in many computer vision tasks and are widely used as backbones in large-scale vision and vision-language foundation models.
Benchmark evidence is limited
Evidence graph: 2 refs, 1 links.
Utility signals: depth 60/100, grounding 58/100, status medium.
Implementation
No direct implementation yet
Maintained implementation evidence is not confirmed for this paper yet.
Use the implementation status and reproduction sections for the current action plan.
No verified maintained repo yet
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
- No direct maintained implementation was found. Use the paper PDF and citation graph to design a baseline reproduction.
- Start from this likely method family: Transformer.
- Track assumptions and missing details in an experiment log before coding.
Time to first repro: a few days
Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.
- Estimate is based on paper-only reproduction flow
Reproduction readiness
No repo
No verified implementation available
- No maintained repository has been identified for this paper. Check adjacent implementations or HF artifacts below.
Hardware requirements
- Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
Validation caveat
Framework baselines
- Hugging Face Transformers training guide
Modern transformer training baseline.
- PyTorch nn.Transformer docs
Reference transformer building block implementation.
Hugging Face artifacts
No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet. Use targeted searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.
Tip: start with models, then check datasets and spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.
Research context
Tasks
Image classification
Methods
Transformer
Domains
Computer vision
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPXJump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.