aiqbench analysis
This study isolates the primary driver of poor generalization in dermatology AI, revealing that shifts in disease distribution outweigh skin-tone underrepresentation as a source of error. The findings indicate that specialized cancer-focused features fail to cluster unfamiliar conditions, whereas foundation models retain stronger transferable structures even across diverse populations. By releasing an evaluation protocol and code, the authors provide essential tools for auditing model robustness before deployment in resource-constrained settings.
Disease Burden over Skin Tone: Decomposing the Dermatology-AI Generalization Gap
arXiv:2609.02111v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Dermatology artificial intelligence (AI) models are predominantly trained on light-skinned, cancer-focused image collections, yet they are increasingly proposed for deployment in resource-constrained settings where patients differ from training populations along two confounded axes: skin tone and disease distribution. We investigate whether poor generalization is primarily caused by skin-tone underrepresentation or disease-distribution shift. We evaluate a cancer-trained baseline (ResNet-50 fine-tuned on HAM10000 and ISIC 2019), two dermatology foundation models (DermLIP and MONET), and a general-purpose vision model (DINOv3) as frozen feature extractors. Models are evaluated on a tone-stratified disease-matched dataset (Diverse Dermatology Images, DDI) and a disease-shifted tone-diverse dataset (Skin Condition Image Network, SCIN). Our results show that disease-distribution shift contributes more than skin tone in the evaluated settings. The cancer baseline decreases from 0.62 to 0.21 balanced accuracy when transferred to unfamiliar clinical conditions, while the within-disease skin-tone gap is smaller (0.10-0.18) and inconsistent. Label-free representation analysis shows that this failure reflects a representational limitation rather than only missing output labels: cancer-specialized features poorly cluster unfamiliar conditions (kNN purity lift +0.06 over chance), whereas dermatology-pretrained features retain stronger transferable structure (+0.23). Finally, we show that representation quality predicts recoverable performance under lightweight adaptation. Starting from dermatology foundation models, approximately ten labeled examples per clinical category recover most attainable performance. We release the evaluation protocol and code to support reproducible auditing of dermatology AI generalization.
Abstract:Dermatology artificial intelligence (AI) models are predominantly trained on light-skinned, cancer-focused image collections, yet they are increasingly proposed for deployment in resource-constrained settings where patients differ from training populations along two confounded axes: skin tone and disease distribution. We investigate whether poor generalization is primarily caused by skin-tone underrepresentation or disease-distribution shift. We evaluate a cancer-trained baseline (ResNet-50 fine-tuned on HAM10000 and ISIC 2019), two dermatology foundation models (DermLIP and MONET), and a general-purpose vision model (DINOv3) as frozen feature extractors. Models are evaluated on a tone-stratified disease-matched dataset (Diverse Dermatology Images, DDI) and a disease-shifted tone-diverse dataset (Skin Condition Image Network, SCIN). Our results show that disease-distribution shift contributes more than skin tone in the evaluated settings. The cancer baseline decreases from 0.62 to 0.21 balanced accuracy when transferred to unfamiliar clinical conditions, while the within-disease skin-tone gap is smaller (0.10-0.18) and inconsistent. Label-free representation analysis shows that this failure reflects a representational limitation rather than only missing output labels: cancer-specialized features poorly cluster unfamiliar conditions (kNN purity lift +0.06 over chance), whereas dermatology-pretrained features retain stronger transferable structure (+0.23). Finally, we show that representation quality predicts recoverable performance under lightweight adaptation. Starting from dermatology foundation models, approximately ten labeled examples per clinical category recover most attainable performance. We release the evaluation protocol and code to support reproducible auditing of dermatology AI generalization.
Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (cs.CV); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Machine Learning (cs.LG)
arXiv:2609.02111 [cs.CV]
(or arXiv:2609.02111v1 [cs.CV] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.02111 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 327 words
Related coverage
DERM-3R: A Resource-Efficient Multimodal Agents Framework for Dermatologic Diagnosis and Treatment in Real-World Clinical Settings
arXiv · Oct 7, 2026

The benefits of medical AI assistance vary based on user expertise
MIT News · Aug 4, 2026
MIFR: A Modality-Invariant and Fair Representation Framework for Skin Disease Classification
arXiv · Aug 20, 2026

Research into how AI can help users understand skin conditions
Google Research · Jun 12, 2026