On Mathews Correlation Coefficient and Improved Distance Map Loss for Automatic Glacier Calving Front Segmentation in SAR Imagery
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
The vast majority of the outlet glaciers and ice streams of the polar ice sheets end in the ocean. Ice mass loss via calving of the glaciers into the ocean has increased over the last few decades. Information on the temporal variability of the calving front position provides fundamental information on the state of the glacier and ice stream, which can be exploited as calibration and validation data to enhance ice dynamics modeling. To identify the calving front position automatically, deep neural network-based semantic segmentation pipelines can be used to delineate the acquired SAR imagery. However, the extreme class imbalance is highly challenging for the accurate calving front segmentation in these images. Therefore, we propose the use of the Mathews correlation coefficient (MCC) as an early stopping criterion because of its symmetrical properties and its invariance towards class imbalance. Moreover, we propose an improvement to the distance map-based binary cross-entropy (BCE) loss function. The distance map adds context to the loss function about the important regions for segmentation and helps accounting for the imbalanced data. Using Mathews correlation coefficient as early stopping demonstrates an average 15% dice coefficient improvement compared to the commonly used BCE. The modified distance map loss further improves the segmentation performance by another 2%. These results are encouraging as they support the effectiveness of the proposed methods for segmentation problems suffering from extreme class imbalances.
Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 9 of its 39 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Feb 2021.
Builds on
9 of 39 references.
References · 9
- 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 36,960
- 2015U-Net: Convolutional Networks for Biomedical Image Segmentationcited by 19,604
- 2015SegNet: A Deep Convolutional Encoder-Decoder Architecture for Image Segmentationcited by 1,483
- 2020Image Segmentation Using Deep Learning: A Surveycited by 659
- 2015Cyclical Learning Rates for Training Neural Networkscited by 627
- 2020A survey of loss functions for semantic segmentationcited by 216
- 2018Boundary loss for highly unbalanced segmentationcited by 187
- 2019Deep Learning vs. Traditional Computer Visioncited by 94
- 2019Distance Map Loss Penalty Term for Semantic Segmentationcited by 27
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2022: 1; 2023: 0; 2024: 0; 2025: 4.
5 papers.
- 2025Comparison Study: Glacier Calving Front Delineation in Synthetic Aperture Radar Images With Deep Learningcited by 2
- 2025SSL4SAR: Self-Supervised Learning for Glacier Calving Front Extraction from SAR Imagerycited by 1
- 2025Multi-temporal Calving Front Segmentationcited by 1
- 2022Heterogeneous Feature Distillation Network for SAR Image Semantic Segmentationcited by 0
- 2025AMD-HookNet++: Evolution of AMD-HookNet with Hybrid CNN-Transformer Feature Enhancement for Glacier Calving Front Segmentationcited by 0
- 2025AMD-HookNet++: Evolution of AMD-HookNet with Hybrid CNN-Transformer Feature Enhancement for Glacier Calving Front Segmentation16 Dec 2025
- 2025Multi-temporal Calving Front Segmentation12 Dec 2025
- 2025SSL4SAR: Self-Supervised Learning for Glacier Calving Front Extraction from SAR Imagery2 Jul 2025
- 2025Comparison Study: Glacier Calving Front Delineation in Synthetic Aperture Radar Images With Deep Learning9 Jan 2025
- 2022Heterogeneous Feature Distillation Network for SAR Image Semantic Segmentation17 Oct 2022