arxiv: 2605.06086 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-07 · 💻 cs.CV

Recognition: unknown

LARGO: Low-Rank Hypernetwork for Handling Missing Modalities

Niels Vyncke , Pooya Ashtari , Aleksandra Pi\v{z}urica

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-08 14:09 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.CV

keywords missing modalitieshypernetworktensor decompositionmultimodal segmentationmedical imaginglow-rank approximationbrain tumor segmentation

0 comments

The pith

A hypernetwork with Canonical Polyadic decomposition unifies all 2^N-1 missing-modality configurations into one segmentation network.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper shifts the missing-modality problem from feature engineering to weight space. It builds a single hypernetwork whose outputs are convolutional weights generated via low-rank Canonical Polyadic tensor decomposition for every possible subset of input modalities. This replaces the usual collection of separate networks with one compact model. On BraTS 2018 and ISLES 2022 the method outperforms recent baselines in the large majority of tested missing-modality patterns while preserving segmentation accuracy. A brief non-medical test on avMNIST indicates the same weight-space compression may apply outside medical imaging.

Core claim

LARGO models the convolutional weights of a U-Net-style segmenter as a low-rank tensor that is factorized with Canonical Polyadic decomposition; a hypernetwork then maps any observed modality mask to the corresponding factor combination, thereby producing a complete set of weights tailored to the available modalities without retraining or architectural redesign.

What carries the argument

Hypernetwork that outputs the factors of a Canonical Polyadic decomposition of the convolutional weight tensors, allowing shared low-rank parameters to reconstruct distinct weight sets for each of the 2^N-1 modality subsets.

If this is right

Only one model needs to be trained and stored regardless of how many modalities can be absent at inference time.
The same trained hypernetwork can be applied to datasets that differ in the number of available modalities without changing its architecture.
Memory and compute costs at inference stay close to those of a standard single-modality network.
Average Dice gains of 0.68% on BraTS and 2.53% on ISLES are reported over prior state-of-the-art methods across dozens of missing-modality scenarios.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The same low-rank weight generation idea could be tested on classification or registration tasks that also face variable modality availability.
If the rank required for good performance stays small as the base network grows, the method may scale to larger vision transformers or more modalities.
Clinical workflows could simplify because hospitals would maintain and update only a single model file rather than a family of modality-specific ones.

Load-bearing premise

The convolutional weights required by different missing-modality combinations can be recovered with acceptable accuracy from a shared low-rank tensor factorization.

What would settle it

Train fully separate, full-rank networks for each modality subset and measure whether their Dice scores exceed those of the single LARGO network by more than a few percent on the same test cases.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.06086 by Aleksandra Pi\v{z}urica, Niels Vyncke, Pooya Ashtari.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: Tensor diagram of the proposed CPD reparameterization of the convolutional and transposed convolutional layers. Multimodal imaging combines complementary information from different acquisition protocols to improve accuracy [Baltrušaitis et al., 2018, Bayoudh et al., 2022]. In brain tumor segmentation, T2-weighted imaging reveals edema through fluid sensitivity, while contrastenhanced T1-weighted imagin… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Illustration of LARGO. The dedicated models view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Qualitative comparison on BraTS 2018. Ground truth (GT) and predictions from different view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Qualitative comparison on the ISLES 2022 dataset. Predictions from different methods view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Configuration of the nnU-Net architecture used for the BraTS 2018 dataset. The encoder path (left) progressively downsamples the input through conv blocks with increasing channels. Skip connections transfer encoder features to the decoder path (right), which upsamples back to the original resolution. Numbers indicate channels×spatial resolution. This section describes the base network architectures used… view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Modality-Specific Encoders. Separate convolutional encoders process each modality independently. The image encoder processes 28 × 28 grayscale MNIST images through a 4-layer CNN with progressively increasing channels (16, 32, 64, 128), producing a 160-dimensional feature vector. The audio encoder processes MFCC spectrograms through a similar 4-layer CNN architecture with adapted dimensions, producing a 32… view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Configuration of the fusion architecture used for the avMNIST dataset. The image and view at source ↗

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: Ablation study on the rank R for the ISLES 2022 dataset using 5-fold cross-validation. We present the values R/4, R/2, R, 2R, and 7R, with R as in Equation (3), as well as the performance of the dedicated models (Ded.), which is approximately equivalent in terms of number of parameters to the 7R case. The points for the average Dice score (↑) and Hausdorff95 distance (↓) are represented in blue and red, … view at source ↗

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: Tensor diagram of the Tucker reparameterization of the convolutional and transposed convolutional layers view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Addressing missing modalities is an important challenge in multimodal image analysis and often relies on complex architectures that do not transfer easily to different datasets without architectural modifications or hyperparameter tuning. While most existing methods tackle this problem in feature space by engineering representations that are robust to missing inputs, we instead operate in weight space. We propose LARGO, a hypernetwork that compresses the $2^N-1$ dedicated missing-modality models into a single network by modelling the convolutional weights using the Canonical Polyadic (CP) tensor decomposition. Extensive experimental validation on BraTS 2018 (4 modalities, 15 scenarios) and ISLES 2022 (3 modalities, 7 scenarios) shows that our method ranks first in 47 out of 52 configurations, achieving average Dice improvements of +0.68$\%$ and +2.53$\%$ over state-of-the-art baselines (mmFormer, M$^{3}$AE, ShaSpec, SimMLM). A proof-of-concept experiment on avMNIST suggests that LARGO may extend beyond medical imaging to heterogeneous non-medical modalities.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

LARGO puts a hypernetwork with CP weight decomposition in front of a segmentation backbone to cover all missing-modality masks in one model, but the low-rank fit itself is never checked.

read the letter

The paper's actual move is to generate the convolutional kernels for every possible missing-modality pattern from a single hypernetwork whose output weights are forced through a CP tensor factorization. That is distinct from the feature-space masking or imputation baselines they cite, and the single-model claim is practically useful if it works. On BraTS 2018 and ISLES 2022 they run the full set of 15 and 7 scenarios respectively and report first place in 47 of 52 cases plus small average Dice lifts over mmFormer, M³AE, ShaSpec and SimMLM. The avMNIST proof-of-concept is a minor plus for generality. Those are the concrete positives. The load-bearing part is the CP decomposition. The abstract and the reported numbers give no rank value, no per-layer reconstruction error, and no ablation that compares the low-rank hypernetwork against either a full-rank hypernetwork or a set of independently trained models. Without those numbers it is impossible to know whether the claimed compression preserves the necessary weight variation or whether the modest gains come from the hypernetwork training procedure itself. The percentage improvements are small enough that the absence of statistical tests or clear data-split details also weakens the ranking claims. The rest of the experimental setup looks standard for the domain and the citations are to the right recent papers. This is worth a serious referee for anyone working on deployable multimodal segmentation in medical imaging or similar settings where missing inputs are routine. The architecture is new enough and the experimental scope broad enough that the community should see the full details and the missing ablations before deciding whether the weight-space route is worth pursuing further.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper introduces LARGO, a hypernetwork that employs Canonical Polyadic (CP) tensor decomposition to compress the convolutional weights of 2^N-1 dedicated missing-modality models into a single network. It reports that this approach ranks first in 47 of 52 missing-modality configurations on BraTS 2018 (4 modalities) and ISLES 2022 (3 modalities), with average Dice improvements of +0.68% and +2.53% over baselines including mmFormer, M³AE, ShaSpec, and SimMLM, plus a proof-of-concept on avMNIST.

Significance. If the low-rank CP modeling of weight variations holds with negligible reconstruction error, the method would provide a compact, transferable alternative to per-configuration models or feature-space imputation techniques for missing modalities in medical imaging, reducing the need for dataset-specific architectural changes.

major comments (2)

[Method (hypernetwork and CP decomposition description)] The central claim rests on the assumption that the 2^N-1 sets of convolutional kernels lie on a low-dimensional CP manifold that a hypernetwork can parameterize accurately. No quantitative verification is supplied (chosen CP rank, per-layer Frobenius reconstruction error, or ablation of low-rank vs. full-rank weight generation), which is load-bearing: without it, reported Dice gains cannot be confidently attributed to the compression rather than the hypernetwork architecture or training procedure.
[Experiments and results] Table or results section reporting the 47/52 first-place rankings and average Dice deltas: the small percentage gains (+0.68%, +2.53%) require accompanying statistical significance tests, exact train/validation/test splits, and per-scenario baseline numbers to support the cross-dataset superiority claim.

minor comments (2)

[Abstract] Abstract: inconsistent LaTeX rendering of baseline names (M$^{3}$AE) and percentage signs; add a sentence on the specific CP rank and any hyperparameter selection procedure.
[Experiments] The avMNIST experiment is presented only as a proof-of-concept; clarify whether the same CP rank and hypernetwork architecture were used without modification.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the detailed and constructive feedback on our manuscript. We address each major comment below, outlining the revisions we plan to incorporate to strengthen the paper.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Method (hypernetwork and CP decomposition description)] The central claim rests on the assumption that the 2^N-1 sets of convolutional kernels lie on a low-dimensional CP manifold that a hypernetwork can parameterize accurately. No quantitative verification is supplied (chosen CP rank, per-layer Frobenius reconstruction error, or ablation of low-rank vs. full-rank weight generation), which is load-bearing: without it, reported Dice gains cannot be confidently attributed to the compression rather than the hypernetwork architecture or training procedure.

Authors: We agree that explicit quantitative verification of the low-rank CP assumption is necessary to support the central claim. In the revised manuscript, we will report the CP rank selected for each convolutional layer, provide per-layer Frobenius reconstruction errors between the hypernetwork-generated weights and the corresponding dedicated full models, and add an ablation comparing performance of the low-rank CP hypernetwork against a full-rank weight-generation baseline. These additions will allow readers to assess the fidelity of the manifold approximation and better attribute the observed gains. revision: yes
Referee: [Experiments and results] Table or results section reporting the 47/52 first-place rankings and average Dice deltas: the small percentage gains (+0.68%, +2.53%) require accompanying statistical significance tests, exact train/validation/test splits, and per-scenario baseline numbers to support the cross-dataset superiority claim.

Authors: We acknowledge the value of these details for rigorous evaluation. The revised version will expand the results tables to include per-scenario Dice scores for all baselines, explicitly state the train/validation/test splits used on BraTS 2018 and ISLES 2022, and report statistical significance (paired t-tests across multiple random seeds) for the average improvements. These changes will provide stronger evidence for the reported rankings and deltas. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity; empirical claims rest on independent baselines and public datasets

full rationale

The paper's derivation introduces a hypernetwork that parameterizes convolutional weights via CP tensor decomposition for the 2^N-1 missing-modality masks. This modeling choice is an architectural ansatz whose validity is tested by direct comparison of Dice scores against externally published methods (mmFormer, M³AE, etc.) on BraTS 2018 and ISLES 2022. No equation reduces a reported performance gain to a fitted parameter by construction, no uniqueness theorem is imported from prior self-work, and no self-citation chain is load-bearing for the central result. The experimental ranking (47/52 first places) is therefore falsifiable against independent implementations and does not collapse to the input assumptions.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on the assumption that weight tensors across modality subsets admit a useful low-rank CP structure, plus standard tensor algebra.

free parameters (1)

CP decomposition rank
Hyperparameter controlling the rank of the weight tensor approximation, chosen to balance compression and accuracy.

axioms (1)

domain assumption Canonical Polyadic decomposition can sufficiently approximate the variations in convolutional weights induced by different missing-modality patterns.
Core modeling choice enabling compression of 2^N-1 models into one network.

invented entities (1)

LARGO hypernetwork no independent evidence
purpose: Generates convolutional weights for arbitrary missing-modality combinations via low-rank structure.
Newly introduced architecture in the paper.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5496 in / 1235 out tokens · 60527 ms · 2026-05-08T14:09:55.968432+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

18 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

[1]

Ujjwal Baid, Satyam Ghodasara, Suyash Mohan, Michel Bilello, Evan Calabrese, Errol Colak, and et al

doi: 10.26599/CVM.2025.9450399. Ujjwal Baid, Satyam Ghodasara, Suyash Mohan, Michel Bilello, Evan Calabrese, Errol Colak, and et al. The RSNA-ASNR-MICCAI BraTS 2021 benchmark on brain tumor segmentation and radiogenomic classification,

work page doi:10.26599/cvm.2025.9450399 2025
[2]

The RSNA-ASNR-MICCAI BraTS 2021 Benchmark on Brain Tumor Segmentation and Radiogenomic Classification

URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2107.02314. Spyridon Bakas, Hamed Akbari, Aristeidis Sotiras, Michel Bilello, Martin Rozycki, Justin S. Kirby, and et al. Advancing The Cancer Genome Atlas glioma MRI collections with expert segmentation labels and radiomic features.Scientific Data, 4(1):170117, September

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv
[3]

Kirby, John B

ISSN 2052-4463. doi: 10.1038/sdata.2017.117. URL https://www.nature.com/articles/sdata2017117. Pub- lisher: Nature Publishing Group. Tadas Baltrušaitis, Chaitanya Ahuja, and Louis-Philippe Morency. Multimodal machine learning: A survey and taxonomy.IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, 41(2): 423–443,

work page doi:10.1038/sdata.2017.117 2052
[4]

doi: 10.1038/s41467-025-62373-x

ISSN 2041-1723. doi: 10.1038/s41467-025-62373-x. Reuben Dorent, Samuel Joutard, Marc Modat, Sébastien Ourselin, and Tom Vercauteren. Hetero- modal variational encoder-decoder for joint modality completion and segmentation. In Dinggang Shen, Tianming Liu, Terry M. Peters, Lawrence H. Staib, Caroline Essert, Sean Zhou, Pew-Thian Yap, and Ali Khan, editors,M...

work page doi:10.1038/s41467-025-62373-x 2041
[5]

, author Joutard, S

ISBN 978-3-030-32245-8. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-32245-8_9. 10 David Ha, Andrew Dai, and Quoc V Le. Hypernetworks.arXiv preprint arXiv:1609.09106,

work page doi:10.1007/978-3-030-32245-8_9
[6]

Moritz R

doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-46723-8_54. Moritz R. Hernandez Petzsche, Ezequiel de la Rosa, Uta Hanning, Roland Wiest, Waldo Valen- zuela, Mauricio Reyes, Maria Meyer, Sook-Lei Liew, Florian Kofler, Ivan Ezhov, David Robben, Alexandre Hutton, Tassilo Friedrich, Teresa Zarth, Johannes Bürkle, The Anh Baran, Björn Menze, Gabriel Broocks, Lukas Meyer, Claus Zimmer...

work page doi:10.1007/978-3-319-46723-8_54 2022
[7]

doi: 10.1038/s41597-022-01875-5

ISSN 2052-4463. doi: 10.1038/s41597-022-01875-5. URL https://www.nature.com/articles/ s41597-022-01875-5. Publisher: Nature Publishing Group. Fabian Isensee, Paul F. Jaeger, Simon A. A. Kohl, Jens Petersen, and Klaus H. Maier-Hein. nnU- net: a self-configuring method for deep learning-based biomedical image segmentation.Nature Methods, 18(2):203–211,

work page doi:10.1038/s41597-022-01875-5 2052
[8]

Nature Methods 18(2), 203–211 (2021)

ISSN 1548-7105. doi: 10.1038/s41592-020-01008-z. URL https://www.nature.com/articles/s41592-020-01008-z . Publisher: Nature Publishing Group. Xu Jia, Bert De Brabandere, Tinne Tuytelaars, and Luc V Gool. Dynamic filter networks.Advances in neural information processing systems, 29,

work page doi:10.1038/s41592-020-01008-z
[9]

Kolda and Brett W

doi: 10.1137/07070111X. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1137/07070111X. V Lebedev, Y Ganin, M Rakhuba, I Oseledets, and V Lempitsky. Speeding-up convolutional neural networks using fine-tuned CP-decomposition. In3rd International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2015-Conference Track Proceedings,

work page doi:10.1137/07070111x 2015
[10]

Dn-splatter: Depth and normal priors for gaussian splatting and meshing

doi: 10.1109/W ACV57701.2024.00106. Bjoern H. Menze, Andras Jakab, Stefan Bauer, Jayashree Kalpathy-Cramer, Keyvan Farahani, Justin Kirby, and et al. The multimodal brain tumor image segmentation benchmark (BraTS).IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, 34(10):1993–2024,

work page doi:10.1109/w 2024
[11]

Elvis Nava, Seijin Kobayashi, Yifei Yin, Robert K Katzschmann, and Benjamin F Grewe

doi: 10.1109/TMI.2014.2377694. Elvis Nava, Seijin Kobayashi, Yifei Yin, Robert K Katzschmann, and Benjamin F Grewe. Meta- learning via classifier (-free) diffusion guidance.arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.08942,

work page doi:10.1109/tmi.2014.2377694 2014
[12]

doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-44794-0

ISSN 2045-2322. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-44794-0. URL https://www. nature.com/articles/s41598-023-44794-0. Publisher: Nature Publishing Group. Nicholas D. Sidiropoulos, Lieven De Lathauwer, Xiao Fu, Kejun Huang, Evangelos E. Papalexakis, and Christos Faloutsos. Tensor decomposition for signal processing and machine learning.IEEE Transactions on Signal Proc...

work page doi:10.1038/s41598-023-44794-0 2045
[13]

doi: 10.1109/TSP.2017.2690524

ISSN 1053-587X, 1941-0476. doi: 10.1109/TSP.2017.2690524. URLhttp://arxiv.org/abs/1607.01668. Hu Wang, Yuanhong Chen, Congbo Ma, Jodie Avery, Louise Hull, and Gustavo Carneiro. Multi- modal learning with missing modality via shared-specific feature modelling. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 15878–...

work page doi:10.1109/tsp.2017.2690524 1941
[14]

Deep multimodal learning with missing modality: A survey,

URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2409.07825. Amir Zadeh, Minghai Chen, Soujanya Poria, Erik Cambria, and Louis-Philippe Morency. Tensor fusion network for multimodal sentiment analysis. InProceedings of the 2017 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing, pages 1103–1114,

work page arXiv 2017
[15]

Graph hypernetworks for neural architecture search

Chris Zhang, Mengye Ren, and Raquel Urtasun. Graph hypernetworks for neural architecture search. arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.05749,

work page arXiv
[16]

(All conv layers use instance normalization + leaky ReLU) Figure 5: Configuration of the nnU-Net archi- tecture used for the BraTS 2018 dataset

12 A Backbone Architecture 4×1283 Stem Block Conv Block 1 Downsample Conv Block 2 Downsample Conv Block 3 Downsample Conv Block 4 Downsample Bridge Block 3×1283 Head Block Decoder Block 4 Concatenate Upsample Decoder Block 3 Concatenate Upsample Decoder Block 2 Concatenate Upsample Decoder Block 1 Concatenate Upsample 32×1283 64×643 128×323 256×163 512×83...

2018
[17]

The downsampling layers progressively increase the channel dimensions (64, 128, 256,

ISLES 2022 Dataset.For the ISLES 2022 dataset, the network has one fewer downsample and upsample layer. The downsampling layers progressively increase the channel dimensions (64, 128, 256,

2022
[18]

The image encoder processes 28×28 grayscale MNIST images through a 4-layer CNN with progressively increasing channels (16, 32, 64, 128), producing a 160-dimensional feature vector

Modality-Specific Encoders.Separate convolutional encoders process each modality indepen- dently. The image encoder processes 28×28 grayscale MNIST images through a 4-layer CNN with progressively increasing channels (16, 32, 64, 128), producing a 160-dimensional feature vector. The audio encoder processes MFCC spectrograms through a similar 4-layer CNN ar...

2022