Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 37 references

SAM4EM: Efficient memory-based two stage prompt-free segment anything model adapter for complex 3D neuroscience electron microscopy stacks

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read SAM4EM claims that a prompt-free, memory-aware adapter for the Segment Anything Model outperforms existing methods on 3D electron-microscopy segmentation of glia and synapses.

desk verdict SAM4EM is a plausible engineering package, but its headline SOTA numbers sit on an unreleased self-annotated dataset plus clear reporting contradictions, so treat the claims as provisional. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.21544 v1 pith:MVQJUXZ6 submitted 2025-04-30 cs.CV

Uzair Shah , Marco Agus , Daniya Boges , Vanessa Chiappini , Mahmood Alzubaidi , Jens Schneider , Markus Hadwiger , Pierre J. Magistretti
show 2 more authors
Mowafa Househ Corrado Cal{i}
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords electronmicroscopysegmentationsegmentanythingmodelprompt-freelow-rankadaptationLoRA3Dmemoryattentiongliasynapse
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper aims to establish that a prompt-free adapter built on the Segment Anything Model (SAM) can segment complex 3D electron-microscopy brain structures—especially glia and synapses—more accurately than existing SAM-based and transformer baselines. The method replaces manual prompts with a two-stage self-prompting loop that uses the previous slice's mask, adds low-rank (LoRA) fine-tuning for efficiency, and a memory attention mechanism for slice-to-slice consistency. The authors back the claim with experiments on mitochondria, glia, and synapses, plus a newly curated annotated dataset for the latter two structures. If the claim holds, neuroscience labs could segment difficult neural structures automatically with modest GPU budgets.

What carries the argument

The central object is the bi-directional self-prompting loop combined with an efficient 3D memory encoder. The first prompt encoder takes the previous slice's predicted mask as a noisy prompt; the first decoder generates a coarse prior mask; a second prompt encoder and decoder refine it, creating an iterative refinement loop. The efficient memory encoder propagates context along the z-axis by combining current slice features with previous mask features and updating memory slots through an exponential moving average, $M_t = (1-\alpha)M_{t-1} + \alpha F_t$, with $\alpha = 0.3$ and eight memory slots. A multi-scale feature enhancer fuses 1/4, 1/8, and 1/16 resolution features to preserve fine boundary details, and LoRA bypass paths keep the image encoder mostly frozen, reducing trainable parameters by about 85%.

What would settle it

Once the Mice- dataset is made public, rerun the head-to-head comparison with independently produced expert annotations for glia and synapses; if SAM4EM's reported 11.5-point Dice advantage over H-SAM on synapses (53.8 vs 42.3) does not reproduce, the paper's central claim collapses.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

SAM4EM's core claim is that a two-stage prompt-free adapter, built on SAM2 and fine-tuned with LoRA, can match or beat specialized baselines on well-bounded structures such as mitochondria and clearly beat them on irregular, boundary-poor structures such as astrocytic processes and post-synaptic densities. On the curated Mice- dataset the paper reports Dice scores of 70.5 for glia, 80.7 for mitochondria, and 53.8 for synapses, and 92.4 Dice on the public Lucchi mitochondria benchmark; in Table 1 these figures place SAM4EM ahead of H-SAM, SAMed, and UN-SAM across all datasets. The largest reported advantage is 11.5 Dice points over H-SAM on synapses.

Load-bearing premise

The entire superiority claim for glia and synapse segmentation is measured on a newly curated dataset whose annotations were made by the authors and whose release details, annotation protocol, and splits are not given in the main text, so the results depend on those annotations being correct and representative.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Neuroscience labs could segment entire EM volumes, including the 448-slice Mice- stack, without clicking prompt points, because the model generates its own prompts from the previous slice's mask.
  • The LoRA-based adapter cuts trainable parameters by about 85% and fits in roughly 4 GB of GPU memory during training, making foundation-model fine-tuning practical on a single consumer GPU.
  • The two-stage mask decoding plus memory attention is a general volumetric recipe that can be carried to other biomedical volumes where structures change gradually between slices.
  • If the glia and synapse benchmark is released as stated, it would give the community a first standard dataset for comparing SAM-based adapters on these difficult structures.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the memory attention generalizes the way it does in video foundation models, the same adapter should transfer to 2D+t microscopy or video object segmentation where structures deform between frames rather than between slices.
  • The claimed 11.5-point Dice improvement on synapses is concentrated on a dataset the authors annotated themselves, so an independent expert re-annotation and public release of the splits would turn that number into a reproducible benchmark result.
  • A natural next experiment is to reverse the slice order or initialize memory from a different slice; if segmentation quality stays the same, the memory mechanism is storing stable object context rather than just a moving average of nearby masks.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes SAM4EM, a prompt-free adapter built on SAM2 for 3D electron microscopy segmentation of mitochondria, glia, and synapses. The architecture combines LoRA-based fine-tuning of the image encoder, a multi-scale feature enhancer, a lightweight memory encoder with attention and exponential moving average updates (Eqs. 1–2), and a bi-directional self-prompting two-stage decoder. Experiments compare against H-SAM, SAMed, and UN-SAM on the Lucchi dataset and a newly curated 'Mice-' dataset, reporting consistent improvements in Table 1, together with a component ablation in Table 2.

Significance. If the reported results are reproducible and the dataset is made available, the paper would be a useful contribution: it presents one of the first SAM adapters specifically for EM neuroscience data, with parameter-efficient fine-tuning and a new benchmark for complex structures. The architecture is described in enough detail to be implemented, and the main equations are clearly specified, with no equation-level circularity. However, the central claim of consistent state-of-the-art performance currently rests on an unreleased, self-annotated dataset, missing ViT baselines, and an internal metric contradiction, so the significance cannot yet be fully assessed.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 6, Lucchi paragraph] The text states that SAM4EM achieves 'a Dice score of 86.1% and an exceptional mIoU of 92.4%' on Lucchi, while Table 1 reports Dice=92.4 and mIoU=86.1 for the same entry. The surrounding sentence claims a 'meaningful improvement over H-SAM' whose Lucchi Dice is 90.5; that claim is coherent only if SAM4EM's Dice is 92.4. Please correct the text to match Table 1 and re-verify all reported numbers for consistency.
  2. [Section 5, Datasets] The novel 'Mices-' dataset is curated by the authors from the EM stack in [2] and annotated by the authors themselves. The main text provides no dataset release link, annotation protocol, split definition, or inter-annotator agreement, and the supplementary material is not present. Because the claimed gains on glia (1.8 Dice points) and synapses (11.5 Dice points) over H-SAM come exclusively from this dataset, the paper's central claim of consistent state-of-the-art performance is not independently verifiable. The authors should either release the dataset and code (as the abstract promises) or provide full annotation and evaluation details in the main text.
  3. [Section 5, hyperparameters] The manuscript says 'the model's performance was optimized through random grid search over hyperparameters' and that the resulting alpha=0.3 and M=8 memory slots were used for the results in Table 1. If this grid search was performed on the same datasets whose test metrics are reported, then the reported numbers are optimistically biased by hyperparameter selection on the test data. Please specify the validation procedure used for hyperparameter selection, or report results obtained with hyperparameters fixed before any test evaluation.
  4. [Section 2 and Table 1] The Related Work section discusses ATFormer [24] and FragViT [20] as state-of-the-art vision-transformer methods for mitochondria segmentation, and the abstract claims improvement over 'other vision transformer-based approaches.' However, Table 1 compares only with H-SAM, SAMed, and UN-SAM. Please add the ViT-based mitochondria baselines to Table 1 (or explain why they cannot be compared) and adjust the claims accordingly, since the current comparison set does not support the abstract's broad claim.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 5, dataset naming] The dataset is referred to as 'Mices-' in Section 5 but as 'Mice-' in Section 6 and Table 1; please use one consistent name throughout.
  2. [Section 6, Overall performance] The text says 'While UN-SAM results were unavailable for comparison,' but Table 1 reports UN-SAM results for all datasets. Please clarify the intended meaning or remove the contradiction.
  3. [Section 6, Ablation experiments] The ablation study runs only 20 epochs on Lucchi and reports single mIoU values without variance, while Table 1 reports the full model at 200 epochs. Please report mean and standard deviation over multiple runs and state the training schedule explicitly, so the ablation can be compared with the main results.
  4. [Throughout] There are several typos: 'synapsis' should be 'synapses,' 'we plane to extend' should be 'we plan to extend,' and 'focussed ion beam' should be 'focused ion beam.'

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

No equation-level circularity, but the reported SOTA gains are partly in-sample: memory hyperparameters were tuned on the same benchmarks and the headline glia/synapse results rest on an unreleased, self-annotated dataset.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section 5, Experimental Setup (Implementation details); results in Table 1]
    "The model's performance was optimized through random grid search over hyperparameters, resulting in an optimal memory momentum parameterα of 0.3 and 8 memory slots for the efficient memory encoder."

    The memory momentum α and memory-slot count M are selected by grid search on the same benchmarks whose Dice/mIoU values are later reported in Table 1 as evidence that SAM4EM 'consistently outperforms baseline approaches across all datasets.' No held-out split or separate validation set is described, so the reported numbers are in-sample selections rather than independent predictions: the chosen hyperparameters are, by construction, the ones that maximized the reported metrics on the evaluation datasets. This does not make the segmentation masks themselves equal to fitted constants, and it does not force the comparison to H-SAM/SAMed by construction, but it means the headline SOTA claim is partially a report of the fitting procedure rather than an independent evaluation.

full rationale

The paper contains no equation-level circularity: the Dice/mIoU values in Table 1 are empirical evaluations of a trained neural network, not quantities derived from the loss or from the memory-update equations by construction, and SAM4EM's output is not defined in terms of the target metric. The main circularity-adjacent step is the Section 5 hyperparameter search: α=0.3 and M=8 are chosen by random grid search, and the same benchmarks are then reported as evidence of consistent outperformance, making the comparison partly in-sample. This is a statistical validity problem, not a full reduction to a fitted parameter. The glia/synapse benchmark is curated from the authors' prior work [2] and annotated by the authors, with protocol and splits deferred to an absent supplementary file; this makes the headline synapse gain unverifiable, but a self-created benchmark is a validity threat, not a circular derivation. The Lucchi metric swap (Section 6 text reports Dice 86.1/mIoU 92.4 while Table 1 reports Dice 92.4/mIoU 86.1) is an internal inconsistency, not circularity. The self-citation [2] supplies raw EM stacks, not annotations or an argument, so it is not load-bearing in the circular sense. Overall, one fitted-input selection step warrants a moderate score, while the central architectural contribution remains independent of the reported quantities by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The method rests on the transferability of SAM2 features to EM data, the validity of the author-curated benchmark, and the standard math of attention and moving averages. The grid-searched hyperparameters alpha and M are free parameters of the memory module.

free parameters (4)
  • memory momentum alpha = 0.3
    Chosen by random grid search over hyperparameters (Section 5); controls exponential moving average in Eq. 2.
  • memory slots M = 8
    Chosen by random grid search (Section 5); number of slots in the memory bank used in Eq. 1 attention.
  • loss weights (Dice/BCE) = 0.5/0.5
    Hand-chosen equal weighting in Eq. 3; not fitted to data.
  • LoRA rank
    Not reported in the paper; a tunable hyperparameter of the LoRA adapter in Section 4.2.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption SAM2 pretrained weights transfer to EM images after LoRA fine-tuning
    Central to the design in Section 4.2; the paper provides no direct evidence for this transfer before fine-tuning.
  • domain assumption EM stack slices can be treated as a temporal sequence for memory propagation
    Assumed throughout Section 4.4; inter-slice continuity is the motivation for the memory encoder.
  • domain assumption The author-curated Mice- dataset annotations are correct and representative
    The headline results on glia and synapses depend entirely on this dataset (Section 5), whose annotation protocol is not described.
  • standard math Standard attention and EMA math
    Eqs. 1-2 use conventional softmax attention and exponential moving average without new theoretical claims.
invented entities (1)
  • Mice- dataset
    purpose: New benchmark for segmentation of glia, synapses, and mitochondria in mouse somatosensory cortex EM stacks
    No public release link or documentation is provided in the paper or on the GitHub page; the annotations are done by the authors.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of SAM4EM: Efficient memory-based two stage prompt-free segment anything model adapter for complex 3D neuroscience electron microscopy stacks." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MVQJUXZ6

@misc{pith2026250421544,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: SAM4EM: Efficient memory-based two stage prompt-free segment anything model adapter for complex 3D neuroscience electron microscopy stacks},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MVQJUXZ6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.21544}
}
read the original abstract

We present SAM4EM, a novel approach for 3D segmentation of complex neural structures in electron microscopy (EM) data by leveraging the Segment Anything Model (SAM) alongside advanced fine-tuning strategies. Our contributions include the development of a prompt-free adapter for SAM using two stage mask decoding to automatically generate prompt embeddings, a dual-stage fine-tuning method based on Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA) for enhancing segmentation with limited annotated data, and a 3D memory attention mechanism to ensure segmentation consistency across 3D stacks. We further release a unique benchmark dataset for the segmentation of astrocytic processes and synapses. We evaluated our method on challenging neuroscience segmentation benchmarks, specifically targeting mitochondria, glia, and synapses, with significant accuracy improvements over state-of-the-art (SOTA) methods, including recent SAM-based adapters developed for the medical domain and other vision transformer-based approaches. Experimental results indicate that our approach outperforms existing solutions in the segmentation of complex processes like glia and post-synaptic densities. Our code and models are available at https://github.com/Uzshah/SAM4EM.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.21544 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Current SOTA segmentation methods for 3D EM are ef [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Overview of the proposed SAM4EM architecture. Our model extends SAM with three key components: (a) feature enhancer [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Architecture of the proposed feature enhancer block. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Architecture of the efficient memory encoder. Image and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Qualitative comparison of segmentation results across [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

37 extracted references · 33 canonical work pages

  1. [2]

    The effects of aging on neuropil structure in mouse somatosensory cor- tex—a 3d electron microscopy analysis of layer 1

    Corrado Cali, Marta Wawrzyniak, Carlos Becker, Bohumil Maco, Marco Cantoni, Anne Jorstad, Biagio Nigro, Federico Grillo, Vincenzo De Paola, Pascal Fua, et al. The effects of aging on neuropil structure in mouse somatosensory cor- tex—a 3d electron microscopy analysis of layer 1. PloS one, 13(7):e0198131, 2018. 7

    work page 2018

  2. [24]

    Adaptive tem- plate transformer for mitochondria segmentation in electron microscopy images

    Yuwen Pan, Naisong Luo, Rui Sun, Meng Meng, Tianzhu Zhang, Zhiwei Xiong, and Yongdong Zhang. Adaptive tem- plate transformer for mitochondria segmentation in electron microscopy images. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF In- ternational Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) , pages 21474–21484, October 2023. 1, 2, 3

    work page 2023

  3. [20]

    Electron microscopy images as set of fragments for mitochondrial segmentation

    Naisong Luo, Rui Sun, Yuwen Pan, Tianzhu Zhang, and Feng Wu. Electron microscopy images as set of fragments for mitochondrial segmentation. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 38(4):3981–3989, Mar

    work page

  4. [1]

    Giepmans, and George Azzopardi

    Anusha Aswath, Ahmad Alsahaf, Ben N.G. Giepmans, and George Azzopardi. Segmentation in large-scale cellular elec- tron microscopy with deep learning: A literature survey. Medical Image Analysis, 89:102920, 2023. 2

    work page 2023

  5. [3]

    Denseunet: densely connected unet for electron microscopy image seg- mentation

    Yue Cao, Shigang Liu, Yali Peng, and Jun Li. Denseunet: densely connected unet for electron microscopy image seg- mentation. IET Image Processing, 14(12):2682–2689, 2020. 2

    work page 2020

  6. [4]

    Sam-adapter: Adapting segment anything in underperformed scenes

    Tianrun Chen, Lanyun Zhu, Chaotao Deng, Runlong Cao, Yan Wang, Shangzhan Zhang, Zejian Li, Lingyun Sun, Ying Zang, and Papa Mao. Sam-adapter: Adapting segment anything in underperformed scenes. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) Workshops, pages 3367–3375, October 2023. 2, 3

    work page 2023

  7. [5]

    Un-sam: Universal prompt-free segmentation for generalized nuclei images

    Zhen Chen, Qing Xu, Xinyu Liu, and Yixuan Yuan. Un-sam: Universal prompt-free segmentation for generalized nuclei images. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.16663, 2024. 7

    arXiv 2024

  8. [6]

    Unleashing the potential of sam for medical adaptation via hierarchi- cal decoding

    Zhiheng Cheng, Qingyue Wei, Hongru Zhu, Yan Wang, Liangqiong Qu, Wei Shao, and Yuyin Zhou. Unleashing the potential of sam for medical adaptation via hierarchi- cal decoding. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 3511–3522, June 2024. 2, 3, 7

    work page 2024

Show all 37 references
  1. [7]

    Residual de- convolutional networks for brain electron microscopy im- age segmentation

    Ahmed Fakhry, Tao Zeng, and Shuiwang Ji. Residual de- convolutional networks for brain electron microscopy im- age segmentation. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, 36(2):447–456, 2017. 2

    2017

  2. [8]

    Jones, Yanling Liu, Dorsa Ziaei, Stephan Huschauer, Igna- cio Arganda-Carreras, Hanspeter Pfister, and Donglai Wei

    Daniel Franco-Barranco, Zudi Lin, Won-Dong Jang, Xuey- ing Wang, Qijia Shen, Wenjie Yin, Yutian Fan, Mingxing Li, Chang Chen, Zhiwei Xiong, Rui Xin, Hao Liu, Huai Chen, Zhili Li, Jie Zhao, Xuejin Chen, Constantin Pape, Ryan Conrad, Luke Nightingale, Joost de Folter, Martin L. ...

    2023

  3. [9]

    Parameter-efficient model adaptation for vision transformers

    Xuehai He, Chunyuan Li, Pengchuan Zhang, Jianwei Yang, and Xin Eric Wang. Parameter-efficient model adaptation for vision transformers. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 37(1):817–825, Jun. 2023. 2

    2023

  4. [10]

    Whole-cell organelle segmentation in volume electron microscopy

    Larissa Heinrich, Davis Bennett, David Ackerman, Woohyun Park, John Bogovic, Nils Eckstein, Alyson Petruncio, Jody Clements, Song Pang, C Shan Xu, et al. Whole-cell organelle segmentation in volume electron microscopy. Nature, 599(7883):141–146, 2021. 1

    2021

  5. [11]

    LoRA: Low-rank adaptation of large language models

    Edward J Hu, yelong shen, Phillip Wallis, Zeyuan Allen- Zhu, Yuanzhi Li, Shean Wang, Lu Wang, and Weizhu Chen. LoRA: Low-rank adaptation of large language models. InIn- ternational Conference on Learning Representations , 2022. 2, 3

    2022

  6. [12]

    Segment anything model for medical images? Medical Image Analysis, 92:103061, 2024

    Yuhao Huang, Xin Yang, Lian Liu, Han Zhou, Ao Chang, Xinrui Zhou, Rusi Chen, Junxuan Yu, Jiongquan Chen, Chaoyu Chen, Sijing Liu, Haozhe Chi, Xindi Hu, Kejuan Yue, Lei Li, Vicente Grau, Deng-Ping Fan, Fajin Dong, and Dong Ni. Segment anything model for medical images? Medical ...

    2024

  7. [13]

    High-precision auto- mated reconstruction of neurons with flood-filling networks

    Michał Januszewski, J ¨orgen Kornfeld, Peter H Li, Art Pope, Tim Blakely, Larry Lindsey, Jeremy Maitin-Shepard, Mike Tyka, Winfried Denk, and Viren Jain. High-precision auto- mated reconstruction of neurons with flood-filling networks. Nature methods, 15(8):605–610, 2018. 2

    2018

  8. [14]

    Segment anything in high quality

    Lei Ke, Mingqiao Ye, Martin Danelljan, Yifan liu, Yu-Wing Tai, Chi-Keung Tang, and Fisher Yu. Segment anything in high quality. In A. Oh, T. Naumann, A. Globerson, K. Saenko, M. Hardt, and S. Levine, editors, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , volume 36, pages...

    2023

  9. [15]

    Berg, Wan-Yen Lo, Piotr Dollar, and Ross Girshick

    Alexander Kirillov, Eric Mintun, Nikhila Ravi, Hanzi Mao, Chloe Rolland, Laura Gustafson, Tete Xiao, Spencer White- head, Alexander C. Berg, Wan-Yen Lo, Piotr Dollar, and Ross Girshick. Segment anything. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Visio...

    2023

  10. [16]

    Asam: Boosting segment anything model with adversarial tuning

    Bo Li, Haoke Xiao, and Lv Tang. Asam: Boosting segment anything model with adversarial tuning. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 3699–3710, June 2024. 3

    2024

  11. [17]

    Transformer-based visual segmenta- tion: A survey

    Xiangtai Li, Henghui Ding, Haobo Yuan, Wenwei Zhang, Jiangmiao Pang, Guangliang Cheng, Kai Chen, Ziwei Liu, and Chen Change Loy. Transformer-based visual segmenta- tion: A survey. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, pages 1–24, 2024. 2

    2024

  12. [18]

    Learning cross-representation affinity consistency for sparsely supervised biomedical instance segmentation

    Xiaoyu Liu, Wei Huang, Zhiwei Xiong, Shenglong Zhou, Yueyi Zhang, Xuejin Chen, Zheng-Jun Zha, and Feng Wu. Learning cross-representation affinity consistency for sparsely supervised biomedical instance segmentation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Co...

  13. [19]

    Supervoxel-based segmentation of mitochondria in em image stacks with learned shape fea- tures

    Aur ´elien Lucchi, Kevin Smith, Radhakrishna Achanta, Gra- ham Knott, and Pascal Fua. Supervoxel-based segmentation of mitochondria in em image stacks with learned shape fea- tures. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging , 31(2):474– 486, 2012. 2, 7

    2012

  14. [21]

    Rankmatch: Exploring the better consistency regularization for semi-supervised semantic segmentation

    Huayu Mai, Rui Sun, Tianzhu Zhang, and Feng Wu. Rankmatch: Exploring the better consistency regularization for semi-supervised semantic segmentation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pat- tern Recognition (CVPR), pages 3391–3401, June 2024. 3

    2024

  15. [22]

    Dualrel: Semi-supervised mitochondria seg- mentation from a prototype perspective

    Huayu Mai, Rui Sun, Tianzhu Zhang, Zhiwei Xiong, and Feng Wu. Dualrel: Semi-supervised mitochondria seg- mentation from a prototype perspective. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 19617–19626, June 2023. 3

    2023

  16. [23]

    Automatic segmentation and reconstruction of intracellular compartments in volumetric electron microscopy data

    Manca ˇZerovnik Mekuˇc, Ciril Bohak, Eva Boneˇs, Samo Hu- doklin, Matija Marolt, et al. Automatic segmentation and reconstruction of intracellular compartments in volumetric electron microscopy data. Computer methods and programs in biomedicine, 223:106959, 2022. 2

    2022

  17. [25]

    V olume electron microscopy.Nature Reviews Methods Primers, 2(1):51, 2022

    Christopher J Peddie, Christel Genoud, Anna Kreshuk, Kim- berly Meechan, Kristina D Micheva, Kedar Narayan, Con- stantin Pape, Robert G Parton, Nicole L Schieber, Yannick Schwab, et al. V olume electron microscopy.Nature Reviews Methods Primers, 2(1):51, 2022. 1

    2022

  18. [26]

    Parameter efficient fine-tuning via cross block orchestration for segment anything model

    Zelin Peng, Zhengqin Xu, Zhilin Zeng, Lingxi Xie, Qi Tian, and Wei Shen. Parameter efficient fine-tuning via cross block orchestration for segment anything model. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 3743–3752, June 2024. 3

    2024

  19. [27]

    Fusionnet: A deep fully residual convo- lutional neural network for image segmentation in connec- tomics

    Tran Minh Quan, David Grant Colburn Hildebrand, and Won-Ki Jeong. Fusionnet: A deep fully residual convo- lutional neural network for image segmentation in connec- tomics. Frontiers in Computer Science, 3:613981, 2021. 2

    2021

  20. [28]

    Sam 2: Segment anything in images and videos

    Nikhila Ravi, Valentin Gabeur, Yuan-Ting Hu, Ronghang Hu, Chaitanya Ryali, Tengyu Ma, Haitham Khedr, Roman R¨adle, Chloe Rolland, Laura Gustafson, Eric Mintun, Junt- ing Pan, Kalyan Vasudev Alwala, Nicolas Carion, Chao- Yuan Wu, Ross Girshick, Piotr Doll´ar, and Christoph Feic...

    2024 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Berger, Art Pope, Yuelong Wu, Tim Blakely, Richard L

    Alexander Shapson-Coe, Michał Januszewski, Daniel R. Berger, Art Pope, Yuelong Wu, Tim Blakely, Richard L. Schalek, Peter H. Li, Shuohong Wang, Jeremy Maitin- Shepard, Neha Karlupia, Sven Dorkenwald, Evelina Sjost- edt, Laramie Leavitt, Dongil Lee, Jakob Troidl, Forrest Coll- ...

    2024

  22. [30]

    Daw: Exploring the better weighting function for semi-supervised semantic segmentation

    Rui Sun, Huayu Mai, Tianzhu Zhang, and Feng Wu. Daw: Exploring the better weighting function for semi-supervised semantic segmentation. In A. Oh, T. Naumann, A. Glober- son, K. Saenko, M. Hardt, and S. Levine, editors, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume ...

    2023

  23. [31]

    Automated synapse-level reconstruction of neural circuits in the larval zebrafish brain

    Fabian Svara, Dominique F ¨orster, Fumi Kubo, Michał Januszewski, Marco Dal Maschio, Philipp J Schubert, J¨orgen Kornfeld, Adrian A Wanner, Eva Laurell, Winfried Denk, et al. Automated synapse-level reconstruction of neural circuits in the larval zebrafish brain. Nature Method...

    2022

  24. [32]

    Lichtman, and Hanspeter Pfister

    Donglai Wei, Zudi Lin, Daniel Franco-Barranco, Nils Wendt, Xingyu Liu, Wenjie Yin, Xin Huang, Aarush Gupta, Won-Dong Jang, Xueying Wang, Ignacio Arganda-Carreras, Jeff W. Lichtman, and Hanspeter Pfister. Mitoem dataset: Large-scale 3d mitochondria instance segmentation from em...

    2020

  25. [33]

    Efficientsam: Leveraged masked image pre- training for efficient segment anything

    Yunyang Xiong, Bala Varadarajan, Lemeng Wu, Xiaoyu Xi- ang, Fanyi Xiao, Chenchen Zhu, Xiaoliang Dai, Dilin Wang, Fei Sun, Forrest Iandola, Raghuraman Krishnamoorthi, and Vikas Chandra. Efficientsam: Leveraged masked image pre- training for efficient segment anything. In Procee...

    2024

  26. [34]

    Efficient low-rank backprop- agation for vision transformer adaptation

    Yuedong Yang, Hung-Yueh Chiang, Guihong Li, Diana Mar- culescu, and Radu Marculescu. Efficient low-rank backprop- agation for vision transformer adaptation. In A. Oh, T. Nau- mann, A. Globerson, K. Saenko, M. Hardt, and S. Levine, editors, Advances in Neural Information Proces...

  27. [35]

    Hive-net: Centerline-aware hierarchical view- ensemble convolutional network for mitochondria segmen- tation in em images

    Zhimin Yuan, Xiaofen Ma, Jiajin Yi, Zhengrong Luo, and Jialin Peng. Hive-net: Centerline-aware hierarchical view- ensemble convolutional network for mitochondria segmen- tation in em images. Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine, 200:105925, 2021. 1

    2021

  28. [36]

    Customized segment any- thing model for medical image segmentation

    Kaidong Zhang and Dong Liu. Customized segment any- thing model for medical image segmentation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.13785, 2023. 7

    2023 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Segment any- thing model for medical image segmentation: Current ap- plications and future directions

    Yichi Zhang, Zhenrong Shen, and Rushi Jiao. Segment any- thing model for medical image segmentation: Current ap- plications and future directions. Computers in Biology and Medicine, 171:108238, 2024. 2, 3

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.