Back

2D anomaly detection of fatal cerebral hemorrhage on postmortem CT

Zirn, A.; Scheurer, E.; Lenz, C.

2026-09-15 forensic medicine
10.64898/2026.09.14.26363002 medRxiv
Show abstract

Postmortem computed tomography (PMCT) is increasingly used in forensic medicine, yet image interpretation remains largely manual and time-consuming, and supervised deep learning is constrained by the scarcity of annotated forensic datasets. This study investigated whether diffusion-based generative models can detect fatal cerebral haemorrhage on PMCT through reconstruction-based anomaly detection, using solely image-level labels derived from the documented cause of death. Postmortem brain CT examinations acquired at a single forensic institute between 2011 and 2025 were retrospectively analyzed, comprising 265 healthy subjects and 33 cases of fatal intracranial haemorrhage. After automated brain extraction, slice selection and intensity normalization, two diffusion frameworks were trained: an unsupervised denoising diffusion probabilistic model (AnoDDPM) trained on healthy anatomy alone, and a weakly supervised classifier-guided diffusion model exploiting image-level labels. Anomaly scores were derived from the reconstruction error between each slice and its pseudo-healthy reconstruction, and detection was assessed at the image level using 95% bootstrap confidence intervals. AnoDDPM achieved an AUROC of 0.928 (95% CI 0.812-0.989) and an AUPRC of 0.794 (95% CI 0.429-0.946), whereas the classifier-guided model reached an AUROC of 0.991 (95% CI 0.984-0.997) with an AUPRC of 0.960 (95% CI 0.855-0.994). These results demonstrate excellent feasibility of diffusion-based anomaly detection for forensic PMCT and indicate that weak, image-level supervision substantially improves detection, thereby supporting the future development of automated triage tools for postmortem brain imaging.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.