Pith. sign in

REVIEW 9 cited by

The Liver Tumor Segmentation Benchmark (LiTS)

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1901.04056 v2 pith:ZNL4WNJ3 submitted 2019-01-13 cs.CV

Patrick Bilic , Patrick Christ , Hongwei Bran Li , Eugene Vorontsov , Avi Ben-Cohen , Georgios Kaissis , Adi Szeskin , Colin Jacobs
show 101 more authors
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords liversegmentationtumormiccaibestachievedalgorithmsbenchmark
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

In this work, we report the set-up and results of the Liver Tumor Segmentation Benchmark (LiTS), which was organized in conjunction with the IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI) 2017 and the International Conferences on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention (MICCAI) 2017 and 2018. The image dataset is diverse and contains primary and secondary tumors with varied sizes and appearances with various lesion-to-background levels (hyper-/hypo-dense), created in collaboration with seven hospitals and research institutions. Seventy-five submitted liver and liver tumor segmentation algorithms were trained on a set of 131 computed tomography (CT) volumes and were tested on 70 unseen test images acquired from different patients. We found that not a single algorithm performed best for both liver and liver tumors in the three events. The best liver segmentation algorithm achieved a Dice score of 0.963, whereas, for tumor segmentation, the best algorithms achieved Dices scores of 0.674 (ISBI 2017), 0.702 (MICCAI 2017), and 0.739 (MICCAI 2018). Retrospectively, we performed additional analysis on liver tumor detection and revealed that not all top-performing segmentation algorithms worked well for tumor detection. The best liver tumor detection method achieved a lesion-wise recall of 0.458 (ISBI 2017), 0.515 (MICCAI 2017), and 0.554 (MICCAI 2018), indicating the need for further research. LiTS remains an active benchmark and resource for research, e.g., contributing the liver-related segmentation tasks in \url{http://medicaldecathlon.com/}. In addition, both data and online evaluation are accessible via \url{www.lits-challenge.com}.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 9 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Learning Segmentation from Radiology Reports

    eess.IV 2025-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    R-Super converts tumor count, size, and location information from radiology reports into voxel-wise losses that improve CT tumor segmentation beyond training with masks alone.

  2. Are Vision Language Models Ready for Clinical Diagnosis? A 3D Medical Benchmark for Tumor-centric Visual Question Answering

    cs.CV 2025-05 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    DeepTumorVQA, a 9,262-volume 3D medical VQA benchmark, shows that current vision-language models handle measurement but remain far from clinical-grade lesion recognition and reasoning.

  3. DIET-CP: Lightweight and Data Efficient Self Supervised Continued Pretraining

    cs.CV 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    DIET-CP continues pretraining a vision model by classifying each image by its index on roughly 1000 unlabeled images, improving medical and astronomical classification while degrading fine-grained natural-image classi...

  4. Q-Former Autoencoder: A Modern Framework for Medical Anomaly Detection

    cs.CV 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    QFAE, combining a frozen DINOv2 encoder, a Q-Former bottleneck, and a masked-autoencoder perceptual loss, reaches 94.3, 91.8, and 83.8 AUROC on BraTS2021, RESC, and RSNA.

  5. PanTS: The Pancreatic Tumor Segmentation Dataset

    eess.IV 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    PanTS is a new large CT dataset with expert-drawn pancreatic tumor and anatomy labels, and models trained on it beat prior public benchmarks.

  6. Optimal Linear Baseline Models for Scientific Machine Learning

    cs.LG 2025-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Closed-form rank-constrained linear estimators, derived from Bayes risk, unify forward modeling, inverse recovery, autoencoding, and denoising, and often match or beat trained neural networks.

  7. Uncertainty-Aware Segmentation Quality Prediction via Deep Learning Bayesian Modeling: Comprehensive Evaluation and Interpretation on Skin Cancer and Liver Segmentation

    cs.CV 2025-08 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    A deep learning framework predicts segmentation quality from uncertainty maps and image features, achieving high Dice correlation on skin and liver segmentation without test-time ground truth.

  8. Towards Continuous-variable Quantum Neural Networks for Biomedical Imaging

    quant-ph 2025-11 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A 4-qumode Gaussian CV-QNN classifies MedMNIST images with accuracy statistically indistinguishable from a 42-parameter classical linear model and a DV-QNN.

  9. Automated MRI Tumor Segmentation using hybrid U-Net with Transformer and Efficient Attention

    eess.IV 2025-06 reject novelty 4.0 of 10

    A hybrid U-Net with transformer bottleneck and attention modules reports Dice 0.764 on a local MRI dataset, but the evaluation appears to use training data rather than a held-out test set.

Pith tools