mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

The segmentation ceiling: why explicit left-ventricular masks do not improve learned ejection-fraction regression

arXiv 2609.19730 ↗First posted 17 Sep 2026eess.IV cs.CVcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Accurate estimation of left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) from echocardiography is central to cardiovascular care, and deep learning enables automated EF prediction from echocardiographic video. Because EF is clinically derived from left-ventricular (LV) volumes, a widely held intuition is that explicit LV segmentation should improve prediction. We introduce a quantitative criterion, the segmentation ceiling, that makes this testable: from EF as a normalized difference of end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes, we derive in closed form how per-frame segmentation area error propagates into EF error, and thus the accuracy a mask must reach before it can improve on direct regression. Using EchoNet-Dynamic, a UniFormer-S backbone, and the empirically measured within-patient error correlation, the criterion places the break-even near 10% per-frame area error, whereas a representative segmenter operates at roughly 14%, above the ceiling. Consistent with this, four strategies for injecting segmentation or area information (a predicted-mask channel, end-diastolic/end-systolic clip sampling, and per-bin and amplitude area-consistency objectives) fail to beat a raw-video baseline; ground-truth masks help only through label leakage. Input representation thus not being the limit, we identify generalization as the practical lever: weight averaging with strong augmentation attains a test R^2 of 0.806 (MAE 4.08) under a matched dense-clip protocol, comparable to an R(2+1)D baseline (0.811) while tightening the validation-to-test gap. Finally, a heteroscedastic beta-NLL formulation yields informative, well-calibrated per-prediction uncertainty, larger for clinically harder low-EF cases, where Monte-Carlo dropout does not. The segmentation ceiling gives a concrete design criterion for when mask-guided EF estimation is worthwhile, plus a simple, uncertainty-aware recipe for EF regression.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 10 of its 21 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 Sep 2026.

Builds on

10 of 21 references.

References · 10

  1. 2015Dropout as a Bayesian Approximation: Representing Model Uncertainty in Deep Learningcited by 4,416
  2. 2017Rethinking Atrous Convolution for Semantic Image Segmentationcited by 2,154
  3. 2017A Closer Look at Spatiotemporal Convolutions for Action Recognitioncited by 1,139
  4. 2022UniFormer: Unified Transformer for Efficient Spatiotemporal Representation Learningcited by 182
  5. 2021Ultrasound Video Transformers for Cardiac Ejection Fraction Estimationcited by 34
  6. 2022EchoCoTr: Estimation of the Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction from Spatiotemporal Echocardiographycited by 16
  7. 2026EchoJEPA: A Latent Predictive Foundation Model for Echocardiographycited by 9
  8. 2025Uncertainty Propagation for Echocardiography Clinical Metric Estimation via Contour Samplingcited by 1
  9. 2025Hierarchical Spatio-temporal Segmentation Network for Ejection Fraction Estimation in Echocardiography Videoscited by 1
  10. 2026Generative Regression for Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction Estimation from Echocardiography Videocited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.