Deep Interactive Segmentation of Medical Images: A Systematic Review and Taxonomy
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interactive segmentation is a crucial research area in medical image analysis aiming to boost the efficiency of costly annotations by incorporating human feedback. This feedback takes the form of clicks, scribbles, or masks and allows for iterative refinement of the model output so as to efficiently guide the system towards the desired behavior. In recent years, deep learning-based approaches have propelled results to a new level causing a rapid growth in the field with 121 methods proposed in the medical imaging domain alone. In this review, we provide a structured overview of this emerging field featuring a comprehensive taxonomy, a systematic review of existing methods, and an in-depth analysis of current practices. Based on these contributions, we discuss the challenges and opportunities in the field. For instance, we find that there is a severe lack of comparison across methods which needs to be tackled by standardized baselines and benchmarks.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it