DeCoDrift: Stabilizing Decoder Coupling in Closed-Loop Foundation Segmentation
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Foundation segmentation models such as Segment Anything Model (SAM) are now routinely used in iterative pipelines, where each predicted mask is fed back as the next prompt. This practice turns segmentation into a closed-loop dynamical process, yet the decoder-level behavior of these systems remains largely unexamined. We show that this feedback loop can induce a previously overlooked failure mode, decoder coupling drift, in which the mask decoder's cross-attention progressively loses alignment with the target object, causing errors to accumulate across iterations. We study this phenomenon by instrumenting SAM's mask decoder and deriving ground-truth-free measures of prompt-image coupling, attention stability, and temporal consistency. On volumetric electron microscopy data, these decoder-internal signals reveal that standard iterative prompting systematically degrades attention alignment and temporal coherence relative to oracle-anchored feedback. We then formalize iterative prompting as a discrete-time dynamical system and show how proximal anchoring reduces error amplification in the feedback loop. Building on this analysis, we introduce DeCoDrift, a training-free inference-time stabilization framework that constrains prompt updates and preserves decoder coupling across iterations. Across extensive experiments, DeCoDrift consistently improves attention stability, temporal coherence, and segmentation quality over standard iterative prompting, without retraining or ground-truth supervision. More broadly, our results show that decoder-internal dynamics are not merely diagnostic: they provide actionable signals for stabilizing foundation segmentation models in closed-loop use.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 24 of its 34 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 May 2026.
Builds on
24 of 34 references.
References · 24
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
- 2020An Image is Worth 16x16 Words: Transformers for Image Recognition at Scalecited by 30,186
- 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,459
- 2023Segment Anythingcited by 8,234
- 2018Neural Ordinary Differential Equationscited by 3,779
- 2024SAM 2: Segment Anything in Images and Videoscited by 2,863
- 2021Masked-attention Mask Transformer for Universal Image Segmentationcited by 2,351
- 2022Visual Prompt Tuningcited by 1,681
- 2019What Does BERT Look At? An Analysis of BERT's Attentioncited by 1,003
- 2020Quantifying Attention Flow in Transformerscited by 775
- 2020Transformer Interpretability Beyond Attention Visualizationcited by 627
- 2015Train faster, generalize better: Stability of stochastic gradient descentcited by 552
12 more
- 2023Medical SAM Adapter: Adapting Segment Anything Model for Medical Image Segmentationcited by 490
- 2022XMem: Long-Term Video Object Segmentation with an Atkinson-Shiffrin Memory Modelcited by 439
- 2019Video Object Segmentation using Space-Time Memory Networkscited by 438
- 2023Segment Anything in High Qualitycited by 376
- 2023Segment Anything Model for Medical Image Analysis: an Experimental Studycited by 291
- 2023Personalize Segment Anything Model with One Shotcited by 250
- 2023Track Anything: Segment Anything Meets Videoscited by 234
- 2021Reviving Iterative Training with Mask Guidance for Interactive Segmentationcited by 163
- 2023Segment Anything Model (SAM) for Digital Pathology: Assess Zero-shot Segmentation on Whole Slide Imagingcited by 161
- 2018Stable Recurrent Modelscited by 66
- 2017Superhuman Accuracy on the SNEMI3D Connectomics Challengecited by 64
- 2023Robustness of SAM: Segment Anything Under Corruptions and Beyondcited by 31
Built on by
Not cited yet.