Chronological Contrastive Learning: Few-Shot Progression Assessment in Irreversible Diseases

Clemens Watzenböck, Daniel Aletaha, Michaël Deman, Thomas Deimel, Jana Eder, Ivana Janickova, Robert Janiczek, Peter Mandl, Philipp Seeböck, Gabriela Supp, Paul Weiser, Georg Langs · Mar 23, 2026 · Citations: 0

Open arXiv Find Implementation RSS feed Shortlist (0)

How to use this page

Low trust

Use this as background context only. Do not make protocol decisions from this page alone.

Best use

Background context only

What to verify

Read the full paper before copying any benchmark, metric, or protocol choices.

Evidence quality

Low

Derived from extracted protocol signals and abstract evidence.

Abstract

Quantitative disease severity scoring in medical imaging is costly, time-consuming, and subject to inter-reader variability. At the same time, clinical archives contain far more longitudinal imaging data than expert-annotated severity scores. Existing self-supervised methods typically ignore this chronological structure. We introduce ChronoCon, a contrastive learning approach that replaces label-based ranking losses with rankings derived solely from the visitation order of a patient's longitudinal scans. Under the clinically plausible assumption of monotonic progression in irreversible diseases, the method learns disease-relevant representations without using any expert labels. This generalizes the idea of Rank-N-Contrast from label distances to temporal ordering. Evaluated on rheumatoid arthritis radiographs for severity assessment, the learned representations substantially improve label efficiency. In low-label settings, ChronoCon significantly outperforms a fully supervised baseline initialized from ImageNet weights. In a few-shot learning experiment, fine-tuning ChronoCon on expert scores from only five patients yields an intraclass correlation coefficient of 86% for severity score prediction. These results demonstrate the potential of chronological contrastive learning to exploit routinely available imaging metadata to reduce annotation requirements in the irreversible disease domain. Code is available at https://github.com/cirmuw/ChronoCon.

Abstract-only analysis — low confidence

All signals on this page are inferred from the abstract only and may be inaccurate. Do not use this page as a primary protocol reference.

This paper looks adjacent to evaluation work, but not like a strong protocol reference.
The available metadata is too thin to trust this as a primary source.
The abstract does not clearly describe the evaluation setup.
The abstract does not clearly name benchmarks or metrics.

Human Eval Hub LLM-as-Judge Hub Pairwise Preference Hub

Should You Rely On This Paper?

This paper is adjacent to HFEPX scope and is best used for background context, not as a primary protocol reference.

Best use

Background context only

Use if you need

Background context only.

Main weakness

This paper looks adjacent to evaluation work, but not like a strong protocol reference.

Trust level

Low

Usefulness score

0/100 • Low

Treat as adjacent context, not a core eval-method reference.

Human Feedback Signal

Not explicit in abstract metadata

Evaluation Signal

Weak / implicit signal

Usefulness for eval research

Adjacent candidate

Extraction confidence 15%

If you are doing eval pipeline work, start here:

Human Eval Hub LLM-as-Judge Hub Pairwise Preference Hub Tool-Use Eval Hub

What We Could Verify

These are the protocol signals we could actually recover from the available paper metadata. Use them to decide whether this paper is worth deeper reading.