# Cascade Detector Analysis and Application to Biomedical Microscopy

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.21598 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.21598/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 6 of its 28 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 30 Apr 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 6 of 6)

- [U-Net: Convolutional Networks for Biomedical Image Segmentation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1505.04597/) (2015)
- [Faster R-CNN: Towards Real-Time Object Detection with Region Proposal Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1506.01497/) (2015)
- [HEST-1k: A Dataset for Spatial Transcriptomics and Histology Image Analysis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.16192/) (2024)
- [Accelerating Data Processing and Benchmarking of AI Models for Pathology](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.06750/) (2025)
- [Active Sensing for Search and Tracking: A Review](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2112.02381/) (2021)
- [The Open Connectome Project Data Cluster: Scalable Analysis and Vision for High-Throughput Neuroscience](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1306.3543/) (2013)

## Abstract (arXiv)

As both computer vision models and biomedical datasets grow in size, there is an increasing need for efficient inference algorithms. We utilize cascade detectors to efficiently identify sparse objects in multiresolution images. Given an object's prevalence and a set of detectors at different resolutions with known accuracies, we derive the accuracy, and expected number of classifier calls by a cascade detector. These results generalize across number of dimensions and number of cascade levels. Finally, we compare one- and two-level detectors in fluorescent cell detection, organelle segmentation, and tissue segmentation across various microscopy modalities. We show that the multi-level detector achieves comparable performance in 30-75% less time. Our work is compatible with a variety of computer vision models and data domains.