MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413156549 · doi:10.1109/cvpr52734.2025.00432

DSV-LFS: Unifying LLM-Driven Semantic Cues with Visual Features for Robust Few-Shot Segmentation

2025· article· en· W4413156549 on OpenAlexafffund
Amin Karimi, Charalambos Poullis

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceShot (pellet)SegmentationArtificial intelligenceImage segmentationComputer visionNatural language processing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Few-shot semantic segmentation (FSS) aims to enable models to segment novel/unseen object classes using only a limited number of labeled examples. However, current FSS methods frequently struggle with generalization due to incomplete and biased feature representations, especially when support images do not capture the full appearance variability of the target class. To improve the FSS pipeline, we propose a novel framework that utilizes large language models (LLMs) to adapt general class semantic information to the query image. Furthermore, the framework employs dense pixel-wise matching to identify similarities between query and support images, resulting in enhanced FSS performance. Inspired by reasoning-based segmentation frameworks, our method, named DSV-LFS, introduces an additional token into the LLM vocabulary, allowing a multimodal LLM to generate a "semantic prompt" from class descriptions. In parallel, a dense matching module identifies visual similarities between the query and support images, generating a "visual prompt". These prompts are then jointly employed to guide the prompt-based decoder for accurate segmentation of the query image. Comprehensive experiments on the benchmark datasets Pascal-5<sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">i</sup> and COCO20<sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">i</sup> demonstrate that our framework achieves state-of-the-art performance-by a significant margin-demonstrating superior generalization to novel classes and robustness across diverse scenarios. The source code is available at https://github.com/aminpdik/DSV-LFS

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.803
Threshold uncertainty score0.565

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.276 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot LearningFrench-language works237,207