Share your thoughts, 1 month free Claude Pro on usSee more
WorkDL logo mark

SSMamba: A Self-Supervised Hybrid State Space Model for Pathological Image Classification

About

Pathological diagnosis is highly reliant on image analysis, where Regions of Interest (ROIs) serve as the primary basis for diagnostic evidence, while whole-slide image (WSI)-level tasks primarily capture aggregated patterns. To extract these critical morphological features, ROI-level Foundation Models (FMs) based on Vision Transformers (ViTs) and large-scale self-supervised learning (SSL) have been widely adopted. However, three core limitations remain in their application to ROI analysis: (1) cross-magnification domain shift, as fixed-scale pretraining hinders adaptation to diverse clinical settings; (2) inadequate local-global relationship modeling, wherein the ViT backbone of FMs suffers from high computational overhead and imprecise local characterization; (3) insufficient fine-grained sensitivity, as traditional self-attention mechanisms tend to overlook subtle diagnostic cues. To address these challenges, we propose SSMamba, a hybrid SSL framework that enables effective fine-grained feature learning without relying on large external datasets. This framework incorporates three domain-adaptive components: Mamba Masked Image Modeling (MAMIM) for mitigating domain shift, a Directional Multi-scale (DMS) module for balanced local-global modeling, and a Local Perception Residual (LPR) module for enhanced fine-grained sensitivity. Employing a two-stage pipeline, SSL pretraining on target ROI datasets followed by supervised fine-tuning (SFT), SSMamba outperforms 11 state-of-the-art (SOTA) pathological FMs on 10 public ROI datasets and surpasses 8 SOTA methods on 6 public WSI datasets. These results validate the superiority of task-specific architectural designs for pathological image analysis.

Enhui Chai, Sicheng Chen, Tianyi Zhang, Xingyu Li, Tianxiang Cui• 2026

Related benchmarks

TaskDatasetResultRank
Survival PredictionTCGA-BLCA--
116
ClassificationPanda
Accuracy79.91
30
Pathological image classificationCAM16
Accuracy93.51
24
Pathological image classificationCRC
AUC87.23
24
Pathological image classificationMHIST
AUC85.63
24
Image ClassificationCRC
Accuracy84.26
19
Medical Image ClassificationNCT
Accuracy99.46
19
HER2 status classificationTCGA-BRCA
AUC64.71
18
Image ClassificationMHIST
Accuracy87.73
17
Pathological image classificationPRCC
Accuracy98.58
12
Showing 10 of 31 rows

Other info

Follow for update