MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Promi: an Efficient Prototype-Mixture Baseline for Few-Shot Segmentation with Bounding-Box Annotations

2025· article· en· W4413945294 on OpenAlexaff
Florent Chiaroni, Ali Ayub, Ola Ahmad

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Processing and 3D Reconstruction
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityThales (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceBaseline (sea)Minimum bounding boxShot (pellet)Bounding overwatchSegmentationArtificial intelligenceComputer visionComputer graphics (images)Image (mathematics)Geology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In robotics applications, few-shot segmentation is crucial because it allows robots to perform complex tasks with minimal training data, facilitating their adaptation to diverse, real-world environments. However, pixel-level annotations of even small amount of images is highly time-consuming and costly. In this paper, we present a novel few-shot binary segmentation method based on bounding-box annotations instead of pixel-level labels. We introduce, ProMi, an efficient prototype-mixture-based method that treats the background class as a mixture of distributions. Our approach is simple, training-free, and effective, accommodating coarse annotations with ease. Compared to existing baselines, ProMi achieves the best results across different datasets with significant gains, demonstrating its effectiveness. Furthermore, we present qualitative experiments tailored to real-world mobile robot tasks, demonstrating the applicability of our approach in such scenarios. Our code: https://github.com/ThalesGroup/promi.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0060.004
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.008

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.289
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage Processing and 3D ReconstructionFrench-language works237,207