Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 44 references

CovHuSeg: An Enhanced Approach for Kidney Pathology Segmentation

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Convex-hull post-processing of predicted segmentation masks improves Dice score for every tested deep-learning model on kidney glomeruli images, with absolute gains of 0.005–0.033 across normal and noisy test sets.

desk verdict A simple, honestly-cited convex hull post-processing trick that shows consistent but statistically unsupported Dice gains; worth a lightweight referee, not a headline result. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.18893 v1 pith:YFGB5H4K submitted 2024-11-28 eess.IV cs.CV

Huy Trinh , Khang Tran , Nam Nguyen , Tri Cao , Binh Nguyen This is my paper · ORCID
classification eess.IVcs.CV
keywords kidneypathologyglomerulisegmentationconvexhullpost-processingdeeplearningDicescorewholeslideimagesmedicalimage
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper proposes CovHuSeg, a post-processing step that takes a segmentation model's predicted mask, traces its contour, replaces that contour by the smallest enclosing convex polygon, and fills the polygon back into a mask. The claim is that this purely geometric repair improves segmentation accuracy because glomeruli are ball-shaped and should never appear as hole-riddled, concave, or fragmented shapes. The authors test the step on four deep-learning segmentation models (UNet, UNet++, UNet3+, and TransUNet) under four data-reduction splits of the KPIs2024 kidney pathology challenge, on both clean and Gaussian-noised test images. They report that Dice score rises for every model and every split, with absolute gains from 0.005 to 0.033, and that the relative gains are largest for the weakest model and for noisy inputs.

What carries the argument

The central object is the convex hull of the closed contour extracted from a model's binary mask: the smallest convex polygon that contains every point of that contour. The CovHuSeg pipeline is four steps: extract the contour, compute its convex hull, then fill the resulting hull contour to produce a new mask. The hull is what injects the prior that a glomerulus is a compact, convex, hole-free blob, and it removes internal holes and forbids unusual shapes that cannot be glomeruli. The algorithm is implementation-agnostic about how the hull is computed, citing Quickhull and other standard routines as interchangeable choices.

What would settle it

Measure the area gap between each ground-truth glomerulus mask and its own convex hull on the KPIs2024 test set; if a large fraction of ground-truth masks are significantly non-convex, then uniformly positive Dice gains from CovHuSeg would be hard to reproduce, and the reported improvements would have to be explained by something other than the convexity prior.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that requiring the output mask to be a filled convex polygon is a sufficient geometric prior for glomerulus segmentation: after CovHuSeg, every tested model scores higher Dice than its raw prediction in all sixteen model–split combinations. The absolute Dice increase is 0.005 to 0.032 on normal test patches and 0.008 to 0.033 on noisy test patches; the relative increase is larger for the models with lower starting accuracy, reaching 10.40% for TransUNet on the noisiest comparison. The authors interpret this as evidence that the convex hull repairs the kinds of mistakes deep networks make on this task, internal holes, concave dents, and fragmented boundaries, rather than merely rescoring confident pixels.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that every glomerulus in these PAS-stained images is convex or near-convex, so replacing a predicted mask with its filled convex hull moves the mask toward the ground truth rather than inflating it beyond the true object.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Any deep-learning segmentation model for PAS-stained kidney glomeruli can be given a Dice gain of roughly 0.5 to 3.3 percentage points at inference time by applying CovHuSeg, with no retraining or architecture change.
  • The method matters most when training data are scarce: relative gains on reduced-subject and reduced-sample splits are consistently larger than on the full-data split for all four models.
  • CovHuSeg also recovers part of the accuracy lost when test images are corrupted by Gaussian noise, so it behaves as a cheap inference-time regularizer for ball-shaped targets.
  • Because the hull step operates only on the output mask, the same recipe should transfer to other ball-shaped anomalies, such as cell nuclei or follicles, wherever the ground-truth boundaries are near-convex.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A natural testable extension is to apply CovHuSeg to instance-level metrics and boundary-aware measures, since filling holes and straightening contours should also improve those scores; the paper reports only Dice.
  • The near-monotone relationship between lower baseline accuracy and larger gains suggests the hull acts mainly on fragmented predictions; if so, its benefit should shrink as baseline quality approaches the annotation ceiling, a prediction that could be checked on near-perfect models.
  • One could fold convexity into training by adding a convex-hull-aware loss term, which the authors propose as future work; the mechanism implies this would reduce the artifacts the post-processor currently fixes.
  • A reader could test whether the gains partly come from matching the annotation style rather than histologic truth: if challenge ground truths were drawn as smooth convex polygons, the hull moves predictions toward the labels' geometric style, so re-evaluating on pixel-exact manual traces would separate the two effects.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes CovHuSeg, a post-processing method that takes a deep-learning model's predicted segmentation mask, extracts its contour, replaces that contour by its convex hull, and fills the hull to produce the final mask. The motivation is that kidney glomeruli are approximately ball-shaped, so enforcing convexity should remove holes and irregular protrusions. The method is evaluated on the KPIs2024 kidney pathology dataset with four models (UNet, UNet++, UNet3+, TransUNet), four training-data splits of varying size, and both normal and Gaussian-noised test sets. The authors report absolute Dice improvements between 0.005 and 0.033 across all configurations and conclude that CovHuSeg improves accuracy, especially in limited-data scenarios.

Significance. If the reported improvements are reproducible and robust, CovHuSeg would be a simple, architecture-agnostic, parameter-free post-processing step for kidney glomeruli segmentation, with no fitting and with immediate use of standard convex hull libraries. The paper also engages a relevant geometric prior that is plausible for glomeruli. However, the evidence as presented is not sufficient to establish the central claim: the tables report single-run Dice values with no variance, no repeated seeds, and no statistical tests, and the paper never evaluates the validity of the convexity assumption on the actual ground-truth shapes. These are fixable weaknesses, but they are load-bearing for the claim of universal improvement.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 4.3, Tables 1 and 2] The central claim that CovHuSeg improves Dice for all four models, all four splits, and both normal and noisy test sets rests on a single training run per configuration. The reported absolute gains can be as small as 0.005 (Table 1, UNet Split B: 0.858 to 0.863) and 0.008 (Table 2, UNet Split B), which are on the order of typical run-to-run variation for segmentation networks trained for 150 epochs. The authors should provide multiple seeds (e.g., 3–5) with mean and standard deviation, plus per-image paired Dice differences and a significance test or confidence intervals. Without such uncertainty quantification, the claimed universal improvement cannot be distinguished from training stochasticity.
  2. [Section 3.3 and Figure 3] The CovHuSeg operation is monotonic expansion: replacing the predicted mask by the filled convex hull of its contour adds pixels and removes none. It can therefore improve Dice only when the baseline systematically under-segments relative to a ground truth that is convex or nearly convex; it cannot repair over-segmentation or non-convex structures. The paper neither quantifies under- versus over-segmentation in the baseline predictions nor reports any case where the hull increases error. The favorable example in Figure 3 is not enough; the authors should add a failure analysis, such as a histogram of per-patch Dice change and examples of worsened patches, and an explicit assessment of the convexity of the ground-truth glomeruli.
  3. [Section 4.2 and Section 5] The conclusion that CovHuSeg "performs much better in scenarios with limited data" is not supported by the reported tables. For UNet and UNet++, the absolute gains in Split D (25% of samples) are no larger than in Split A (50% of subjects, 100% of samples): for example, UNet normal gains are 0.005 for both Split B and Split D, while Split C gives 0.007. The larger gains for TransUNet and UNet3+ are confounded by their lower baseline Dice, and no statistical comparison across splits is provided. This claim should be removed or carefully qualified.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 1 and Section 4.3] The introduction states that "all models have increased accuracy in all metrics," but the experimental section reports only Dice. Either report additional metrics (e.g., IoU, precision, recall, boundary Dice) or revise the wording to say "in the reported Dice metric."
  2. [Keywords and affiliation footnote] There are typos: "Segmenation" in the keywords and "Correspondong author" in the footnote should be corrected.
  3. [Figure 3] The caption and surrounding text describe only a favorable example; the authors should state whether this patch is representative of the average behavior or a selected success case, since Figure 3 is otherwise easy to read as cherry-picking.
  4. [Section 4.2] Reproducibility details are incomplete: the paper gives the optimizer, learning rate, and loss weights, but not batch size, input patch resolution, data augmentation, or the random seed used for the reported run. These details should be added.
  5. [Section 4.3] The sentence "applying the CovHuSeg technique can improve the performance of these models compared to using the proposed method" appears to contain a wording error; it should read "compared to not using the proposed method."

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: CovHuSeg is a fixed post-processing rule evaluated against external ground truth, and its convexity guarantee is a description of the algorithm, not a derived prediction.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is an empirical one: applying the CovHuSeg convex-hull post-processing to the output masks of four baseline models increases Dice score on the KPIs2024 test set. The comparison is made against an external, pathologist-annotated ground truth, and no parameter is fitted to the test labels. The post-processing itself is a fixed geometric operation described in Section 3.3: take the predicted mask, form a contour, compute its convex hull, and fill the resulting polygon. The statement in the Abstract that the algorithm 'assures that the outcome mask does not have holes in it or comes in unusual shapes' is true by construction, but it is presented as a property of the algorithm, not as a prediction derived from the algorithm and then verified. The convexity rationale in Section 3.2 and Figure 3 is a domain assumption about glomerular shape, and the reported improvements could fail if that assumption is violated; that is a correctness or robustness risk, not circularity. Self-citations in the related-work section are contextual and are not load-bearing for the experimental result. The absence of multiple seeds and statistical tests is a legitimate reliability concern about the 0.005-0.033 Dice gains, but it does not make the derivation circular. Overall, the derivation chain is self-contained and externally evaluated, so the circularity score is minimal.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on a domain assumption about the convexity of glomeruli, not on any fitted parameter. The only hand-chosen quantity is the Gaussian noise standard deviation used to construct the noisy test set. No invented entities are introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • Gaussian noise standard deviation = 0.28
    Hand-chosen to create the noisy test set; not fitted to data, but it defines the conditions under which the improvement is measured.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Glomeruli in PAS-stained kidney images are convex or near-convex, so convex hull post-processing improves mask accuracy.
    Implicit in Section 3.3 and Figure 3; the entire method relies on this.
  • domain assumption Model prediction errors that hurt Dice are primarily inward (holes and concavities) rather than outward over-segmentation.
    The convex hull can only add area, so improvement requires that under-segmentation dominates; never stated or tested in the paper.
  • standard math Dice score on the provided test masks is a sufficient metric for the claim 'all models have increased accuracy'.
    Used as the sole reported metric; the paper claims other metrics in the intro but does not report them.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of CovHuSeg: An Enhanced Approach for Kidney Pathology Segmentation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YFGB5H4K

@misc{pith2026241118893,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: CovHuSeg: An Enhanced Approach for Kidney Pathology Segmentation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YFGB5H4K}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.18893}
}
read the original abstract

Segmentation has long been essential in computer vision due to its numerous real-world applications. However, most traditional deep learning and machine learning models need help to capture geometric features such as size and convexity of the segmentation targets, resulting in suboptimal outcomes. To resolve this problem, we propose using a CovHuSeg algorithm to solve the problem of kidney glomeruli segmentation. This simple post-processing method is specified to adapt to the segmentation of ball-shaped anomalies, including the glomerulus. Unlike other post-processing methods, the CovHuSeg algorithm assures that the outcome mask does not have holes in it or comes in unusual shapes that are impossible to be the shape of a glomerulus. We illustrate the effectiveness of our method by experimenting with multiple deep-learning models in the context of segmentation on kidney pathology images. The results show that all models have increased accuracy when using the CovHuSeg algorithm.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.18893 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The proposed CovHuSeg algorithm for the kidney glomeruli segmentation. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Segmentation Task [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. An example of using the CovHuSeg algorithm for the problem of kidney [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Examples of Dataset (i) Split A: 50% randomly selected subjects for each group of mouse models, with 100% of patch images per subject; (ii) Split B: 100% subjects for each group of mouse models, with 50% randomly selected patch images per subject; (iii) Split C: 50% ra…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 34 canonical work pages

  1. [37]

    In: Mahmud, M., He, J., Vassanelli, S., van Zun- dert, A., Zhong, N

    Sailunaz, K., Bestepe, D., Alhajj, S., Özyer, T., Rokne, J., Alhajj, R.: Convex hull in brain tumor segmentation. In: Mahmud, M., He, J., Vassanelli, S., van Zun- dert, A., Zhong, N. (eds.) Brain Informatics. pp. 210–225. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2022)

    work page 2022

  2. [42]

    Scientific Reports 14 (07 2024)

    Zheng, J., Wang, L., Gui, J., Yussuf, A.: Study on lung ct image segmentation algo- rithm based on threshold-gradient combination and improved convex hull method. Scientific Reports 14 (07 2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-68409-4

    work page doi:10.1038/s41598-024-68409-4 2024

  3. [1]

    Expert systems with applications85, 114–122 (2017)

    Affonso, C., Rossi, A.L.D., Vieira, F.H.A., de Leon Ferreira, A.C.P., et al.: Deep learning for biological image classification. Expert systems with applications85, 114–122 (2017)

    work page 2017

  4. [2]

    In: ISMM (1)

    Angulo, J., Jeulin, D., et al.: Stochastic watershed segmentation. In: ISMM (1). pp. 265–276 (2007) 10 Huy et al

    work page 2007

  5. [3]

    ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software (TOMS)22(4), 469–483 (1996)

    Barber, C.B., Dobkin, D.P., Huhdanpaa, H.: The quickhull algorithm for con- vex hulls. ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software (TOMS)22(4), 469–483 (1996)

    work page 1996

  6. [4]

    Com- puter methods and programs in biomedicine184, 105273 (2020)

    Bueno, G., Fernandez-Carrobles, M.M., Gonzalez-Lopez, L., Deniz, O.: Glomeru- losclerosis identification in whole slide images using semantic segmentation. Com- puter methods and programs in biomedicine184, 105273 (2020)

    work page 2020

  7. [5]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.10738 (2024)

    Cao,T.,Huang,C.,Li,Y.,Wang,H.,He,A.,Oo,N.,Hooi,B.:Phishagent:Arobust multimodal agent for phishing webpage detection. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.10738 (2024)

    arXiv 2024

  8. [6]

    Are Anomaly Scores Telling the Whole Story? A Benchmark for Multilevel Anomaly Detection

    Cao, T., Trinh, M.H., Deng, A., Nguyen, Q.N., Duong, K., Cheung, N.M., Hooi, B.: Are anomaly scores telling the whole story? a benchmark for multilevel anomaly detection. arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.14515 (2024)

    work page Pith review arXiv 2024

Show all 44 references
  1. [7]

    Cao,T.,Zhu,J.,Pang,G.:Anomalydetectionunderdistributionshift.In:Proceed- ings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision. pp. 6511– 6523 (2023)

    2023

  2. [8]

    Discrete & Computational Geometry 10, 377–409 (1993)

    Chazelle, B.: An optimal convex hull algorithm in any fixed dimension. Discrete & Computational Geometry 10, 377–409 (1993)

    1993

  3. [9]

    In: International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention

    Chen, J., Zhang, Y., Wang, J., Zhou, X., He, Y., Zhang, T.: Ellipsenet: Anchor- free ellipse detection for automatic cardiac biometrics in fetal echocardiography. In: International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention. pp. 218–227 (2021)

    2021

  4. [10]

    Medical Image Analysis97, 103280 (2024)

    Chen, J., Mei, J., Li, X., Lu, Y., Yu, Q., Wei, Q., Luo, X., Xie, Y., Adeli, E., Wang, Y., et al.: Transunet: Rethinking the u-net architecture design for medical image segmentation through the lens of transformers. Medical Image Analysis97, 103280 (2024)

    2024

  5. [11]

    Chen, L.C., Papandreou, G., Schroff, F., Adam, H.: Rethinking atrous convolution for semantic image segmentation (2017),https://arxiv.org/abs/1706.05587

    2017 arXiv

  6. [12]

    In: Proceedings of the European conference on computer vision (ECCV)

    Chen, L.C., Zhu, Y., Papandreou, G., Schroff, F., Adam, H.: Encoder-decoder with atrous separable convolution for semantic image segmentation. In: Proceedings of the European conference on computer vision (ECCV). pp. 801–818 (2018)

    2018

  7. [13]

    Journal of electronic imaging8(3), 279–289 (1999)

    Comer, M.L., Delp III, E.J.: Morphological operations for color image processing. Journal of electronic imaging8(3), 279–289 (1999)

    1999

  8. [14]

    ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software (TOMS)3(4), 398–403 (1977)

    Eddy, W.F.: A new convex hull algorithm for planar sets. ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software (TOMS)3(4), 398–403 (1977)

    1977

  9. [15]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:1708.00251 (2017)

    Gadermayr, M., Dombrowski, A.K., Klinkhammer, B.M., Boor, P., Merhof, D.: Cnn cascades for segmenting whole slide images of the kidney. arXiv preprint arXiv:1708.00251 (2017)

    2017 arXiv

  10. [16]

    Molecular informatics 35(1), 3–14 (2016)

    Gawehn, E., Hiss, J.A., Schneider, G.: Deep learning in drug discovery. Molecular informatics 35(1), 3–14 (2016)

    2016

  11. [17]

    Journal of the American Society of Nephrology30(10), 1953–1967 (2019)

    Ginley, B., Lutnick, B., Jen, K.Y., Fogo, A.B., Jain, S., Rosenberg, A., Walavalkar, V., Wilding, G., Tomaszewski, J.E., Yacoub, R., et al.: Computational segmen- tation and classification of diabetic glomerulosclerosis. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology30(10), 195...

    2019

  12. [18]

    In: Medical Imaging 2018: Digital Pathology

    Govind, D., Ginley, B., Lutnick, B., Tomaszewski, J.E., Sarder, P.: Glomerular detection and segmentation from multimodal microscopy images using a butter- worth band-pass filter. In: Medical Imaging 2018: Digital Pathology. vol. 10581, pp. 297–303. SPIE (2018)

    2018

  13. [19]

    In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF winter conference on applications of computer vi- sion

    Hatamizadeh, A., Tang, Y., Nath, V., Yang, D., Myronenko, A., Landman, B., Roth, H.R., Xu, D.: Unetr: Transformers for 3d medical image segmentation. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF winter conference on applications of computer vi- sion. pp. 574–584 (2022) CovHuSeg: An Enhance...

    2022

  14. [20]

    In: ICASSP 2020-2020 IEEE international conference on acoustics, speech and signal processing (ICASSP)

    Huang,H.,Lin,L.,Tong,R.,Hu,H.,Zhang,Q.,Iwamoto,Y.,Han,X.,Chen,Y.W., Wu, J.: Unet 3+: A full-scale connected unet for medical image segmentation. In: ICASSP 2020-2020 IEEE international conference on acoustics, speech and signal processing (ICASSP). pp. 1055–1059. IEEE (2020)

    2020

  15. [21]

    Kidney international re- ports 4(7), 955–962 (2019)

    Kannan, S., Morgan, L.A., Liang, B., Cheung, M.G., Lin, C.Q., Mun, D., Nader, R.G., Belghasem, M.E., Henderson, J.M., Francis, J.M., et al.: Segmentation of glomeruli within trichrome images using deep learning. Kidney international re- ports 4(7), 955–962 (2019)

    2019

  16. [22]

    Kingma, D.P., Ba, J.: Adam: A method for stochastic optimization (2017),https: //arxiv.org/abs/1412.6980

    2017 arXiv

  17. [23]

    Computer Graphics and Image Processing 15(4), 319–338 (1981)

    Kohler, R.: A segmentation system based on thresholding. Computer Graphics and Image Processing 15(4), 319–338 (1981)

    1981

  18. [24]

    Computers & Electrical Engineering 87, 106765 (2020)

    Koppu, S., Maddikunta, P.K.R., Srivastava, G.: Deep learning disease prediction model for use with intelligent robots. Computers & Electrical Engineering 87, 106765 (2020)

    2020

  19. [25]

    IEEE Trans- actions on Image Processing16(5), 1437–1445 (2007)

    Levner, I., Zhang, H.: Classification-driven watershed segmentation. IEEE Trans- actions on Image Processing16(5), 1437–1445 (2007)

    2007

  20. [26]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.02253 (2024)

    Li, Y., Huang, C., Deng, S., Lock, M.L., Cao, T., Oo, N., Hooi, B., Lim, H.W.: Knowphish: Large language models meet multimodal knowledge graphs for enhanc- ing reference-based phishing detection. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.02253 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  21. [27]

    In: 2009 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation

    Ma,J.,Zhang,J.,Hu,J.:Glomerulusextractionbyusinggeneticalgorithmforedge patching. In: 2009 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation. pp. 2474–2479. IEEE (2009)

    2009

  22. [28]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems36 (2024)

    MH Nguyen, D., Nguyen, H., Diep, N., Pham, T.N., Cao, T., Nguyen, B., Swoboda, P., Ho, N., Albarqouni, S., Xie, P., et al.: Lvm-med: Learning large-scale self- supervised vision models for medical imaging via second-order graph matching. Advances in Neural Information Processi...

    2024

  23. [29]

    IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence44(7), 3523–3542 (2021)

    Minaee, S., Boykov, Y., Porikli, F., Plaza, A., Kehtarnavaz, N., Terzopoulos, D.: Image segmentation using deep learning: A survey. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence44(7), 3523–3542 (2021)

    2021

  24. [30]

    In: Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence

    Nguyen, D.M., Nguyen, H., Mai, T.T., Cao, T., Nguyen, B.T., Ho, N., Swoboda, P., Albarqouni, S., Xie, P., Sonntag, D.: Joint self-supervised image-volume rep- resentation learning with intra-inter contrastive clustering. In: Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Int...

    2023

  25. [31]

    Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine241, 107748 (2023)

    Nguyen, T.C., Nguyen, T.P., Cao, T., Dao, T.T.P., Ho, T.N., Nguyen, T.V., Tran, M.T.: Manet: Multi-branch attention auxiliary learning for lung nodule detection and segmentation. Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine241, 107748 (2023)

    2023

  26. [32]

    In: Medical Imaging 2001: Image Processing

    Pohle, R., Toennies, K.D.: Segmentation of medical images using adaptive region growing. In: Medical Imaging 2001: Image Processing. vol. 4322, pp. 1337–1346. SPIE (2001)

    2001

  27. [33]

    In: 2019 international conference on computational intelligence and knowledge economy (ICCIKE)

    Raghavan,P.,ElGayar,N.:Frauddetectionusingmachinelearninganddeeplearn- ing. In: 2019 international conference on computational intelligence and knowledge economy (ICCIKE). pp. 334–339. IEEE (2019)

    2019

  28. [34]

    In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision

    Rahman, M.M., Shokouhmand, S., Bhatt, S., Faezipour, M.: Mist: Medical image segmentation transformer with convolutional attention mixing (cam) decoder. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision. pp. 404–413 (2024)

    2024

  29. [35]

    In: Medical image computing and computer-assisted 12 Huy et al

    Ronneberger, O., Fischer, P., Brox, T.: U-net: Convolutional networks for biomed- ical image segmentation. In: Medical image computing and computer-assisted 12 Huy et al. intervention–MICCAI 2015: 18th international conference, Munich, Germany, Oc- tober 5-9, 2015, proceedings...

    2015

  30. [36]

    Medical Imaging Tech- nology 36(2), 63–71 (2018)

    Roth, H.R., Shen, C., Oda, H., Oda, M., Hayashi, Y., Misawa, K., Mori, K.: Deep learning and its application to medical image segmentation. Medical Imaging Tech- nology 36(2), 63–71 (2018)

    2018

  31. [38]

    Silva, J., Souza, L., Chagas, P., Calumby, R., Souza, B., Pontes, I., Duarte, A., Pin- heiro, N., Santos, W., Oliveira, L.: Boundary-aware glomerulus segmentation: to- wardone-to-manystaingeneralization.ComputerizedMedicalImagingandGraph- ics 100, 102104 (2022)

    2022

  32. [39]

    In: Advances in data sciences, security and applications: Proceedings of ICDSSA 2019

    Singh, N.S., Hariharan, S., Gupta, M.: Facial recognition using deep learning. In: Advances in data sciences, security and applications: Proceedings of ICDSSA 2019. pp. 375–382. Springer (2020)

    2020

  33. [40]

    Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (2017)

    Vaswani, A.: Attention is all you need. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (2017)

    2017

  34. [41]

    In: Medical Image Computing and Computer Assisted Intervention– MICCAI 2020: 23rd International Conference, Lima, Peru, October 4–8, 2020, Proceedings, Part IV 23

    Yang,H.,Deng,R.,Lu,Y.,Zhu,Z.,Chen,Y.,Roland,J.T.,Lu,L.,Landman,B.A., Fogo, A.B., Huo, Y.: Circlenet: Anchor-free glomerulus detection with circle rep- resentation. In: Medical Image Computing and Computer Assisted Intervention– MICCAI 2020: 23rd International Conference, Lima,...

    2020

  35. [43]

    Zhou, Z., Rahman Siddiquee, M.M., Tajbakhsh, N., Liang, J.: Unet++: A nested u-net architecture for medical image segmentation. In: Deep Learning in Medical Image Analysis and Multimodal Learning for Clinical Decision Support: 4th In- ternational Workshop, DLMIA 2018, and 8th ...

    2018

  36. [44]

    Nature genetics51(1), 12–18 (2019)

    Zou, J., Huss, M., Abid, A., Mohammadi, P., Torkamani, A., Telenti, A.: A primer on deep learning in genomics. Nature genetics51(1), 12–18 (2019)

    2019

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.