ProPanDL: A Modular Architecture for Uncertainty-Aware Panoptic Segmentation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We introduce ProPanDL, a family of networks capable of uncertainty-aware panoptic segmentation. Unlike existing segmentation methods, ProPanDL is capable of estimating full probability distributions for both the semantic and spatial aspects of panoptic segmentation. We implement and evaluate ProPanDL variants capable of estimating both parametric (Variance Network) and parameter-free (SampleNet) distributions quantifying pixel-wise spatial uncertainty. We couple these approaches with two methods (Temperature Scaling and Evidential Deep Learning) for semantic uncertainty estimation. To evaluate the uncertainty-aware panoptic segmentation task, we address limitations with existing approaches by proposing new metrics that enable separate evaluation of spatial and semantic uncertainty. We additionally propose the use of the energy score, a proper scoring rule, for more robust evaluation of spatial output distributions. Using these metrics, we conduct an extensive evaluation of ProPanDL variants. Our results demonstrate that ProPanDL is capable of estimating well-calibrated and meaningful output distributions while still retaining strong performance on the base panoptic segmentation task.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".