GeoLS: an Intensity-based, Geodesic Soft Labeling for Image Segmentation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Soft-label assignments have emerged as prominent strategies in training dense prediction problems, such as image segmentation. These approaches mitigate the limitations of hard labels, such as inter-class relationships in the data and spatial relationships between a given pixel and its neighbors. Nevertheless, most existing methods rely only on ground-truth masks and ignore the underlying image context associated with each label. For instance, image intensities convey information that could potentially clear ambiguities in the annotation. This paper, therefore, proposes a Geodesic Label Smoothing (GeoLS) approach that incorporates image intensity information within the soft labeling process. Specifically, we leverage the geodesic distance transform to capture the intensity variations between pixels. The generated maps geodesically modify the hard labels to obtain new intensity-based soft labels. The resulting geodesic soft labels better model spatial and class-wise relationships as they capture the variations of image gradients across classes and anatomy. The benefits of our intensity-based geodesic soft labels are assessed on three diverse sets of publicly accessible segmentation datasets. Our experimental results show that the proposed method consistently improves the segmentation accuracy compared to state-of-the-art soft-labeling techniques in terms of the Dice similarity and Hausdorff distance.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".