Tests clinical cross-modal prediction by evaluating whether ECG and blood lab measurements can jointly predict a subsequent chest X-ray in a zero-shot retrieval setting. It probes the model's ability to learn from incomplete training data and generalize to full modality combinations. Use when the user wants to benchmark on Symile-MIMIC, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports mean accuracy.
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill symile-mimic-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Symile Mimic Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-symile-mimic-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: symile-mimic-eval
description: Tests clinical cross-modal prediction by evaluating whether ECG and blood lab measurements can jointly predict a subsequent chest X-ray in a zero-shot retrieval setting. It probes the model's ability to learn from incomplete training data and generalize to full modality combinations. Use when the user wants to benchmark on Symile-MIMIC, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports mean accuracy.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2411.01053
bibtex_key: saporta2024symile
confidence: high
---
# symile-mimic-eval
> Contrasting with Symile: Simple Model-Agnostic Representation Learning for Unlimited Modalities — Saporta et al. (2024) (arXiv:2411.01053, 2024)
## What this evaluates
Tests clinical cross-modal prediction by evaluating whether ECG and blood lab measurements can jointly predict a subsequent chest X-ray in a zero-shot retrieval setting. It probes the model's ability to learn from incomplete training data and generalize to full modality combinations.
## Datasets
- **Symile-MIMIC** — total 11622; splits: train/val (11041), test (581); repo https://github.com/rajesh-lab/symile
## Metrics
- `mean accuracy` **(primary)** — range: [0, 1]
- Top-1 retrieval accuracy among 10 candidates (1 positive CXR, 9 sampled negatives) for each query. Reported as mean across 10 bootstrap samples of the test set.
## Input / output format
**Input**: Paired electrocardiogram (ECG) reading and blood laboratory measurements (50 most common labs) collected within 24 hours of hospital admission.
**Output**: Predicted chest X-ray (CXR) image from the candidate set.
## Scoring recipe
```python
candidates = [true_cxr] + sample_9_negatives(test_set_cxr)
for each query in test_set:
scores = model.compute_similarity(query.ecg, query.labs, candidates)
pred = argmax(scores)
if pred == query.true_cxr:
correct += 1
return correct / len(test_set)
```
## Common pitfalls
- Assuming full-dataset negative sampling; the evaluation explicitly uses a 10-candidate set (1 positive + 9 sampled negatives) per query to mitigate overfitting and match clinical retrieval constraints.
- Overlooking the temporal constraint; CXRs must be taken 24-72 hours post-admission, while ECGs/labs are within 24 hours of admission, which affects clinical validity and evaluation setup.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> In [Figure 5]b, we report mean accuracy for Symile and CLIP over 10 bootstrap samples of the test set. While both models surpass random chance (0.1), Symile achieves an average accuracy of $0.435\pm 0.007$ (SE), outperforming CLIP’s $0.387\pm 0.003$ (SE).
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{saporta2024symile,
title={Contrasting with Symile: Simple Model-Agnostic Representation Learning for Unlimited Modalities},
author={Saporta et al. (2024)},
year={2024},
note={arXiv:2411.01053}
}
```
- arXiv: 2411.01053
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!