mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Reverse Classification Accuracy: Predicting Segmentation Performance in the Absence of Ground Truth

arXiv 1702.03407 ↗First posted 11 Feb 2017cs.CVcited by 35

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

When integrating computational tools such as automatic segmentation into clinical practice, it is of utmost importance to be able to assess the level of accuracy on new data, and in particular, to detect when an automatic method fails. However, this is difficult to achieve due to absence of ground truth. Segmentation accuracy on clinical data might be different from what is found through cross-validation because validation data is often used during incremental method development, which can lead to overfitting and unrealistic performance expectations. Before deployment, performance is quantified using different metrics, for which the predicted segmentation is compared to a reference segmentation, often obtained manually by an expert. But little is known about the real performance after deployment when a reference is unavailable. In this paper, we introduce the concept of reverse classification accuracy (RCA) as a framework for predicting the performance of a segmentation method on new data. In RCA we take the predicted segmentation from a new image to train a reverse classifier which is evaluated on a set of reference images with available ground truth. The hypothesis is that if the predicted segmentation is of good quality, then the reverse classifier will perform well on at least some of the reference images. We validate our approach on multi-organ segmentation with different classifiers and segmentation methods. Our results indicate that it is indeed possible to predict the quality of individual segmentations, in the absence of ground truth. Thus, RCA is ideal for integration into automatic processing pipelines in clinical routine and as part of large-scale image analysis studies.

Key facts. Cited by 35 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 11 Feb 2017.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2021: 6; 2022: 5; 2023: 5; 2024: 8; 2025: 6; 2026: 5.

35 papers.

Sort:

  1. 2022Robust machine learning segmentation for large-scale analysis of heterogeneous clinical brain MRI datasetscited by 50
  2. 2023CheXmask: a large-scale dataset of anatomical segmentation masks for multi-center chest x-ray imagescited by 33
  3. 2024Comparative Benchmarking of Failure Detection Methods in Medical Image Segmentation: Unveiling the Role of Confidence Aggregationcited by 12
  4. 2022Estimating Model Performance under Domain Shifts with Class-Specific Confidence Scorescited by 10
  5. 2021FSNet: A Failure Detection Framework for Semantic Segmentationcited by 9
  6. 2024Conformal Performance Range Prediction for Segmentation Output Quality Controlcited by 8
  7. 2021Efficient Model Monitoring for Quality Control in Cardiac Image Segmentationcited by 6
  8. 2022Deep Quality Estimation: Creating Surrogate Models for Human Quality Ratingscited by 6
  9. 2023U-Netmer: U-Net meets Transformer for medical image segmentationcited by 6
  10. 2024Mask of truth: model sensitivity to unexpected regions of medical imagescited by 6
  11. 2025Expectation-Maximization as the Engine of Scalable Medical Intelligencecited by 5
  12. 2023Promises and pitfalls of deep neural networks in neuroimaging-based psychiatric researchcited by 4
23 more
  1. 2024SUDO: a framework for evaluating clinical artificial intelligence systems without ground-truth annotationscited by 4
  2. 2022Automatic identification of segmentation errors for radiotherapy using geometric learningcited by 3
  3. 2024Towards Ground-truth-free Evaluation of Any Segmentation in Medical Imagescited by 3
  4. 2025ConfIC-RCA: Statistically Grounded Efficient Estimation of Segmentation Qualitycited by 3
  5. 2021Deep and Statistical Learning in Biomedical Imaging: State of the Art in 3D MRI Brain Tumor Segmentationcited by 2
  6. 2024Open Challenges on Fairness of Artificial Intelligence in Medical Imaging Applicationscited by 2
  7. 2025Uncertainty-Aware Segmentation Quality Prediction via Deep Learning Bayesian Modeling: Comprehensive Evaluation and Interpretation on Skin Cancer and Liver Segmentationcited by 2
  8. 2021Hardware-aware Real-time Myocardial Segmentation Quality Control in Contrast Echocardiographycited by 1
  9. 2021Automatic quality control framework for more reliable integration of machine learning-based image segmentation into medical workflowscited by 1
  10. 2023Unsupervised bias discovery in medical image segmentationcited by 1
  11. 2026Cross-Model Agreement as a Deployment-Time Reliability Signal for Automatic Polyp Segmentationcited by 1
  12. 2021Quality monitoring of federated Covid-19 lesion segmentationcited by 0
  13. 2022TMS-Net: A Segmentation Network Coupled With A Run-time Quality Control Method For Robust Cardiac Image Segmentationcited by 0
  14. 2023RAISE -- Radiology AI Safety, an End-to-end lifecycle approachcited by 0
  15. 2024Machine Learning Techniques for MRI Data Processing at Expanding Scalecited by 0
  16. 2024QCResUNet: Joint Subject-level and Voxel-level Segmentation Quality Predictioncited by 0
  17. 2025Unsupervised Source-Free Ranking of Biomedical Segmentation Models Under Distribution Shiftcited by 0
  18. 2025Performance Estimation for Supervised Medical Image Segmentation Models on Unlabeled Data Using UniverSegcited by 0
  19. 2025In search of truth: Evaluating concordance of AI-based anatomy segmentation modelscited by 0
  20. 2026Region-Normalized DPO for Medical Image Segmentation under Noisy Judgescited by 0
  21. 2026Quality-Guided Semi-Supervised Learning for Medical Image Segmentationcited by 0
  22. 2026Can Frozen Hyperspherical Features Guide the Selection of Pseudo Masks?cited by 0
  23. 2026Uncertainty-Guided Handshake: Efficient Human-in-the-Loop Refinement for Surgical-Grade Glioma Segmentationcited by 0