Refining Naive Annotations with Limited Expert Guidance for Semantic Segmentation: A Case Study on Underwater Echograms
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
Training models for supervised semantic segmentation typically requires large quantities of pixel-level annotations that are difficult to assemble in many application domains, in particular when metadata is scarce. In the context of underwater echogam analysis for environmental monitoring, metadata scarcity is manifested by a lack of ground truth and limited domain expert resources, hindering standard data annotation processes. We propose an iterative, non-interactive annotation approach that allows us to obtain large quantities of echogram annotations using minimal expert guidance. In a two-stage process, a segmentation neural network is first purposely overfitted to a very small expertly annotated set, and is then used to iteratively refine a larger set of rough, naive annotations. Experiments on the Cape Bathurst Arctic Sea Surface Acoustics (CBASSA) dataset showcase our method's capability to generate annotations for the sea surface and subsurface entrained air bubbles that approach expert quality level (within 5.5 p.p. for the intersection over union and 3 p.p. for the F1-score), starting from simple non-expert lines obtained at a fraction of the time required by experts. They also show that our method is compatible with both convolutional- and transformer-based neural networks, and pave the way for annotating large datasets resulting from long/continuous deployments for underwater environmental monitoring, at minimal cost.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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