mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Benchmarking Self-Supervised 3D Medical Vision Foundation Models and Transferability Estimation

arXiv 2610.17573 ↗First posted 13 Oct 2026cs.CV cs.AIcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Self-supervised pretraining has expanded the pool of 3D medical foundation models, but published evaluations use different datasets, endpoints and fine-tuning protocols. Models also differ in architecture, pretraining objective and data, while downstream targets range from voxel-level masks to patient-level diagnoses and outcomes. As a result, published findings provide little directly comparable evidence for choosing a model for a new task. Direct comparison of adaptation performance requires fine-tuning candidates on labelled target data, at substantial computational cost. We benchmark 23 candidates across the same 14 segmentation, classification and regression tasks spanning multiple anatomies and modalities. No candidate ranked among the top three across all segmentation tasks or across all classification and regression tasks; a convolutional encoder could outperform a transformer trained with the same objective on one task but underperform it on another. We benchmark transferability estimators against the fine-tuned rankings and find that their agreement varies across dense segmentation, classification and regression. InsightRank uses task-appropriate frozen-feature statistics and architecture-aware pairwise comparisons to rank candidates before fine-tuning. Across the 23-model pool, mean Kendall tau-b was 0.431 for segmentation and 0.352 for classification and regression. The segmentation Top 3 contained a task winner on four of nine tasks; the image-level Top 3 contained none on the five tasks, despite better full-ranking agreement than the matched conventional estimators. A three-model shortlist reduced recorded extraction-plus-training job time by 85.8% across seven segmentation tasks. Together, the benchmark provides a common reference for model selection and InsightRank offers a lower-cost way to prioritize fine-tuning, with shortlist performance that differs by target type.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 27 of its 44 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 13 Oct 2026.

Builds on

27 of 44 references.

References · 27

  1. 2024nnU-Net Revisited: A Call for Rigorous Validation in 3D Medical Image Segmentationcited by 240
  2. 2024Generalist Foundation Models from a Multimodal Dataset for 3D Computed Tomographycited by 199
  3. 2019The state of the art in kidney and kidney tumor segmentation in contrast-enhanced CT imaging: Results of the KiTS19 Challengecited by 190
  4. 2020LEEP: A New Measure to Evaluate Transferability of Learned Representationscited by 188
  5. 2021LogME: Practical Assessment of Pre-trained Models for Transfer Learningcited by 172
  6. 2022RankMe: Assessing the downstream performance of pretrained self-supervised representations by their rankcited by 153
  7. 2019Transferability and Hardness of Supervised Classification Taskscited by 127
  8. 2023SAM-Med3D: Towards General-purpose Segmentation Models for Volumetric Medical Imagescited by 107
  9. 2022ISLES 2022: A multi-center magnetic resonance imaging stroke lesion segmentation datasetcited by 106
  10. 2024Merlin: A Computed Tomography Vision-Language Foundation Model and Datasetcited by 102
  11. 2022An Information-Theoretic Approach to Transferability in Task Transfer Learningcited by 81
  12. 2024VoCo: A Simple-yet-Effective Volume Contrastive Learning Framework for 3D Medical Image Analysiscited by 75
15 more
  1. 2021Transferability Estimation using Bhattacharyya Class Separabilitycited by 54
  2. 2020Ranking Neural Checkpointscited by 51
  3. 2021The University of California San Francisco Preoperative Diffuse Glioma MRI (UCSF-PDGM) Datasetcited by 43
  4. 2024BrainSegFounder: Towards 3D Foundation Models for Neuroimage Segmentationcited by 39
  5. 2025A generalizable 3D framework and model for self-supervised learning in medical imagingcited by 31
  6. 2024An OpenMind for 3D medical vision self-supervised learningcited by 26
  7. 2025Primus: Enforcing Attention Usage for 3D Medical Image Segmentationcited by 24
  8. 2021Newer is not always better: Rethinking transferability metrics, their peculiarities, stability and performancecited by 16
  9. 20253D Foundation Model for Generalizable Disease Detection in Head Computed Tomographycited by 12
  10. 2023Pick the Best Pre-trained Model: Towards Transferability Estimation for Medical Image Segmentationcited by 11
  11. 2023The Performance of Transferability Metrics does not Translate to Medical Taskscited by 7
  12. 2025Decipher-MR: A Vision-Language Foundation Model for 3D MRI Representationscited by 6
  13. 2025Large-scale Multi-sequence Pretraining for Generalizable MRI Analysis in Versatile Clinical Applicationscited by 3
  14. 2026Topology-Driven Transferability Estimation of Medical Foundation Models for Segmentationcited by 1
  15. 2026Topology-Driven Transferability Estimation for 3D Medical Vision Foundation Modelscited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.