Two Approaches to Supervised Image Segmentation
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Though performed almost effortlessly by humans, segmenting 2D gray-scale or color images into respective regions of interest (e.g.~background, objects, or portions of objects) constitutes one of the greatest challenges in science and technology as a consequence of several effects including dimensionality reduction(3D to 2D), noise, reflections, shades, and occlusions, among many other possibilities. While a large number of interesting related approaches have been suggested along the last decades, it was mainly thanks to the recent development of deep learning that more effective and general solutions have been obtained, currently constituting the basic comparison reference for this type of operation. Also developed recently, a multiset-based methodology has been described that is capable of encouraging image segmentation performance combining spatial accuracy, stability, and robustness while requiring little computational resources (hardware and/or training and recognition time). The interesting features of the multiset neurons methodology mostly follow from the enhanced selectivity and sensitivity, as well as good robustness to data perturbations and outliers, allowed by the coincidence similarity index on which the multiset approach to supervised image segmentation is founded. After describing the deep learning and multiset neurons approaches, the present work develops comparison experiments between them which are primarily aimed at illustrating their respective main interesting features when applied to the adopted specific type of data and parameter configurations. While the deep learning approach confirmed its potential for performing image segmentation, the alternative multiset methodology allowed for enhanced accuracy while requiring little computational resources.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 24 of its 94 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 19 Jul 2023.
Builds on
24 of 94 references.
References · 24
- 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 37,240
- 2015U-Net: Convolutional Networks for Biomedical Image Segmentationcited by 19,713
- 2017Mask R-CNNcited by 7,277
- 2014Fully Convolutional Networks for Semantic Segmentationcited by 4,859
- 2013Visualizing and Understanding Convolutional Networkscited by 2,290
- 2020Image Segmentation Using Deep Learning: A Surveycited by 660
- 2018Towards Robust Interpretability with Self-Explaining Neural Networkscited by 505
- 2020A Survey on Neural Network Interpretabilitycited by 291
- 2019On instabilities of deep learning in image reconstruction - Does AI come at a cost?cited by 212
- 2019Towards Explainable Artificial Intelligencecited by 106
- 20203D Deep Learning on Medical Images: A Reviewcited by 76
- 2020On hallucinations in tomographic image reconstructioncited by 68
12 more
- 2018DeepVesselNet: Vessel Segmentation, Centerline Prediction, and Bifurcation Detection in 3-D Angiographic Volumescited by 62
- 2023Understanding and Detecting Hallucinations in Neural Machine Translation via Model Introspectioncited by 44
- 2020The troublesome kernel -- On hallucinations, no free lunches and the accuracy-stability trade-off in inverse problemscited by 40
- 2021Further Generalizations of the Jaccard Indexcited by 26
- 2017Improving Interpretability of Deep Neural Networks with Semantic Informationcited by 15
- 2015Deep Learning for Medical Image Segmentationcited by 11
- 2021On Similaritycited by 8
- 2021An Analysis of the Influence of Transfer Learning When Measuring the Tortuosity of Blood Vesselscited by 4
- 2021Multiset Neuronscited by 3
- 2017Dense Pooling layers in Fully Convolutional Network for Skin Lesion Segmentationcited by 2
- 2021Multiset Signal Processing and Electronicscited by 1
- 2022Neuromorphic Networks as Revealed by Features Similaritycited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.