CW-BASS v2: Saturation-Aware Pseudo-Label Selection for Semi-Supervised Segmentation under Foundation-Model Teachers
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Semi-supervised semantic segmentation has long turned on one question, which pseudo-labels to trust, and a generation of selection rules, dynamic thresholds, per-class curricula, soft confidence weights, answered it for the noisy, under-confident ResNet teachers of their day. Self-supervised foundation encoders change the regime: with a DINOv2 teacher, confidence saturates, so the filtering that helped a weak teacher can hurt a strong one. We propose CW-BASS v2, a saturation-aware pseudo-label selection method that reads the teacher's confidence regime rather than committing to one rule. It pairs held-out calibration, an unbiased per-class noise estimate, with a self-adaptive confidence floor that provably bounds retention away from 1, and combines them in a one-pass gate: measure the reliability of the teacher's confident set, pi_kept = Pr[correct | c >= tau], on a held-out slice, and filter strictly when it meets the confidence demanded (pi_kept >= tau), falling back to the adaptive floor otherwise. The boundary is the pre-existing operating threshold, not a value tuned to mIoU, and across six DINOv2 teachers it makes the correct strict-vs-floor call blind. CW-BASS v2 thus recovers the UniMatch V2 operating point on the saturated benchmarks by selecting strict (Pascal VOC 1/8 87.4 against its reported 87.9; Cityscapes within 0.5), and improves on it where the confident set is unreliable (pi_kept ~ 89%, ADE20K), where the floor edges ahead (+1.5 mIoU, single seed). The gate is principled because the failure it avoids is measured, not assumed: on a reliable, saturated teacher the confidence distribution's dynamic range collapses (98% of Pascal pixels >= 0.95), so an adaptive cutoff floods the retention mask and self-training decays into confirmation bias.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 35 of its 42 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 13 Aug 2026.
Builds on
35 of 42 references.
References · 35
- 2023DINOv2: Learning Robust Visual Features without Supervisioncited by 7,764
- 2017On Calibration of Modern Neural Networkscited by 4,860
- 2018Encoder-Decoder with Atrous Separable Convolution for Semantic Image Segmentationcited by 3,210
- 2020FixMatch: Simplifying Semi-Supervised Learning with Consistency and Confidencecited by 2,080
- 2021Vision Transformers for Dense Predictioncited by 1,789
- 2019Learning Imbalanced Datasets with Label-Distribution-Aware Margin Losscited by 987
- 2022Fine-Tuning can Distort Pretrained Features and Underperform Out-of-Distributioncited by 722
- 2021FlexMatch: Boosting Semi-Supervised Learning with Curriculum Pseudo Labelingcited by 537
- 2019Pseudo-Labeling and Confirmation Bias in Deep Semi-Supervised Learningcited by 507
- 2019Confident Learning: Estimating Uncertainty in Dataset Labelscited by 411
- 2019Beyond temperature scaling: Obtaining well-calibrated multiclass probabilities with Dirichlet calibrationcited by 359
- 2022FreeMatch: Self-adaptive Thresholding for Semi-supervised Learningcited by 232
23 more
- 2022Semi-Supervised Semantic Segmentation Using Unreliable Pseudo-Labelscited by 218
- 2021Improving Calibration for Long-Tailed Recognitioncited by 212
- 2021ST++: Make Self-training Work Better for Semi-supervised Semantic Segmentationcited by 184
- 2020Theoretical Analysis of Self-Training with Deep Networks on Unlabeled Datacited by 179
- 2022Revisiting Weak-to-Strong Consistency in Semi-Supervised Semantic Segmentationcited by 177
- 2021CReST: A Class-Rebalancing Self-Training Framework for Imbalanced Semi-Supervised Learningcited by 174
- 2021Dash: Semi-Supervised Learning with Dynamic Thresholdingcited by 147
- 2020Seesaw Loss for Long-Tailed Instance Segmentationcited by 146
- 2023SoftMatch: Addressing the Quantity-Quality Trade-off in Semi-supervised Learningcited by 133
- 2021Perturbed and Strict Mean Teachers for Semi-supervised Semantic Segmentationcited by 113
- 2021Semi-Supervised Semantic Segmentation via Adaptive Equalization Learningcited by 101
- 2021Re-distributing Biased Pseudo Labels for Semi-supervised Semantic Segmentation: A Baseline Investigationcited by 78
- 2024UniMatch V2: Pushing the Limit of Semi-Supervised Semantic Segmentationcited by 53
- 2023CorrMatch: Label Propagation via Correlation Matching for Semi-Supervised Semantic Segmentationcited by 43
- 2023SemiVL: Semi-Supervised Semantic Segmentation with Vision-Language Guidancecited by 41
- 2024AllSpark: Reborn Labeled Features from Unlabeled in Transformer for Semi-Supervised Semantic Segmentationcited by 35
- 2024Towards the Uncharted: Density-Descending Feature Perturbation for Semi-supervised Semantic Segmentationcited by 16
- 2024Beyond Pixels: Semi-Supervised Semantic Segmentation with a Multi-scale Patch-based Multi-Label Classifiercited by 12
- 2023CAFS: Class Adaptive Framework for Semi-Supervised Semantic Segmentationcited by 4
- 2025CW-BASS: Confidence-Weighted Boundary-Aware Learning for Semi-Supervised Semantic Segmentationcited by 4
- 2025Feedback-Driven Pseudo-Label Reliability Assessment: Redefining Thresholding for Semi-Supervised Semantic Segmentationcited by 4
- 2025Rethinking Semi-supervised Segmentation Beyond Accuracy: Reliability and Robustnesscited by 3
- 2025FARCLUSS: Fuzzy Adaptive Rebalancing and Contrastive Uncertainty Learning for Semi-Supervised Semantic Segmentationcited by 2
Built on by
Not cited yet.