REVIEW 3 major objections 7 minor 33 references
Towards Fine-grained Renal Vasculature Segmentation: Full-Scale Hierarchical Learning with FH-Seg
T0 review · 3 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash
Pith's one-line read FH-Seg combines full-scale skip connections and hierarchical soft attention gates to reach state-of-the-art fine-grained renal vasculature segmentation on the new LRV dataset.
desk verdict A substantial new dataset and a modest architecture combo; the abstract overstates the result by quoting one class's Dice/F1, and the label scheme makes the joint six-class claim shaky. read the letter →
The pith
A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.
The reading
What carries the argument
The two mechanisms that carry the argument are the full-scale skip connections ($S_F$) and the learnable hierarchical soft attention gates (HSA). $S_F$ concatenates, at each decoder level, encoder features from all scales up to that level and decoder features from all scales above it, after resampling to a common resolution; this is what lets the network merge fine anatomical detail with coarse semantic context. HSA computes an attention coefficient $\beta_i^m$ for each feature map from a gating signal and a transformed input, through a resampler, a linear transformation $\varphi$, ReLU and sigmoid activations, and applies it by element-wise multiplication, suppressing noise before features are combined. The backbone is a Residual U-Net, and the dataset's labeling scheme, one class per pixel with the whole-artery label never co-occurring with its subcomponent labels, is what makes the six-class task well-defined for this architecture.
What would settle it
Compute the class-averaged Dice and F1 across all six categories for FH-Seg and Omni-Seg; if FH-Seg does not lead by roughly 2.67 and 2.13 points on that average, the abstract's headline comparison is not what it appears to be.
Extended reading notes
Core claim
The paper's central claim is that a Residual U-Net enhanced with full-scale skip connections and learnable hierarchical soft attention gates, called FH-Seg, delivers state-of-the-art fine-grained segmentation of renal vasculature on a new Large Renal Vasculature (LRV) dataset. The full-scale skip connections let each decoder level fuse encoder features from all earlier scales and decoder features from all later scales, while the hierarchical soft attention gates compute per-scale attention coefficients that suppress non-core information before feature fusion. On the LRV dataset, FH-Seg reports 71.23% Dice and 73.06% F1 on the tunica media class, and its per-class results on lumen, artery wall, and hyaline exceed the Omni-Seg baseline by 1.57, 2.03, and 1.23 Dice points respectively; the paper states an overall advantage of 2.67 Dice and 2.13 F1 over Omni-Seg. Ablations attribute about 1.1 points of average Dice gain to the attention gates and about 1.3 points to the full-scale skip connections.
Load-bearing premise
The whole pipeline assumes that each pixel should be assigned exactly one of the six vascular classes, so the 'artery' label and its subcomponent labels (tunica intima, tunica media, artery wall) never appear together in the same image.
Editorial extensions
If this is right
- The LRV dataset gives the renal pathology community a shared, fine-grained benchmark with six classes, so future methods can be compared on the same 16,212-image split.
- Full-scale skip connections plus hierarchical attention can be dropped into a standard U-Net-style backbone, so the design is a practical modification rather than a new architecture family.
- Per-class gains on lumen, artery wall, and hyaline suggest the method reduces both over-segmentation from noise and missed small lesions, which is where earlier models fail.
- The ablation numbers indicate that the attention gates and the skip connections are complementary: each adds roughly one Dice point, and together they add about 2.4 points.
Reading between the lines
- The headline 71.23% Dice and 73.06% F1 figures in the abstract are the tunica media class scores, not a six-class average; a class-averaged comparison could rank the methods differently.
- The single-class labeling rule means the model never sees an image where the whole artery and its subcomponents are labeled together; a hierarchical multi-label training scheme could capture containment relations and may improve consistency on complex vessels.
- All experiments use 512x512 crops from 2048x2048 patches; using the model on full whole-slide images would require a tiling strategy, and the reported scores do not directly measure whole-slide performance.
- The comparison is carried out on a single dataset created by the authors; external validation on other renal pathology cohorts would show whether the gains generalize beyond the LRV distribution.
Signed reviews
Editorial analysis
A structured set of objections, weighed in public.
Referee Report
Summary. The paper proposes FH-Seg, a Residual U-Net variant that augments full-scale skip connections with learnable hierarchical soft attention gates for fine-grained renal vasculature segmentation. The authors also introduce the LRV dataset, containing 16,212 annotated 2048x2048 patches derived from whole-slide images, with six anatomical/pathological classes: lumen, tunica intima, tunica media, artery, artery wall, and hyaline. Experiments on LRV compare FH-Seg against U-Net, DeepLabV3, Swin UNETR, and Omni-Seg in per-class Dice and F1 scores, and an ablation study examines the contribution of each proposed component. The central claim is that FH-Seg achieves state-of-the-art performance on this dataset, with the abstract citing 71.23% Dice and 73.06% F1.
Significance. If the central claim holds, the paper would provide a useful architecture for fine-grained vascular segmentation and a substantial new dataset for renal pathology. The code release and the size of the annotated dataset are concrete strengths. However, the claimed superiority is currently undercut by two issues: the headline metrics are not aggregate scores but the Tunica media row, and the label schema makes the joint six-class task internally inconsistent. The dataset may still be valuable, and the architectural components are simple enough to be reusable, but the SOTA claim as written is not yet well-defined.
major comments (3)
- [Abstract; §5.1, Tables 3-4] The abstract's headline numbers, '71.23% Dice, 73.06% F1', are the Tunica media row of Table 3 (and the corresponding 'Total' row in Table 4), not an aggregate over all six classes. The statement that FH-Seg outperforms Omni-Seg by 2.67 and 2.13 percentage points is likewise specific to that class. The paper should either report a properly averaged Dice/F1 across the six classes or explicitly and consistently present the per-class nature of these claims; otherwise the central quantitative claim is overstated.
- [§4, Labeling Methodology; Tables 2-3] The single-label-per-pixel annotation strategy conflicts with the anatomical description in the same section. The text states that the 'artery' label encompasses the lumen, tunica intima, tunica media, and external elastic regions, yet the methodology forbids co-labeling artery with its subcomponents. Because each category in Table 1 corresponds to a separate image subset, the same kind of tissue (e.g., tunica media) is labeled as 'artery' in some images, as 'tunica media' in others, and as background in lumen-only or wall-only images. A standard six-class one-hot training cannot learn that tunica media is part of the artery while also treating these labels as mutually exclusive, and the per-class metrics in Tables 2-3, evaluated on category-specific subsets, do not demonstrate a coherent joint six-class segmentation. The authors must specify the exact training loss, state how unlabeled structures are excluded or treated, and report results on a consistent label space.
- [§3.3-§3.4; Algorithm 1; Figure 2] The architecture is not described consistently enough to reproduce. Equations (3)-(4) define full-scale skip connections that aggregate the same-level encoder feature, the decoder feature from the level above, and the decoder feature from the level below, while Algorithm 1 only concatenates the current decoder feature with the same-level encoder skip feature. Similarly, the text in §3.4 says the HSA is applied after the full-scale skip connections and before each upsampling step, but in Algorithm 1 the attention weights are computed after the entire decoder loop. The dense full-scale connections in Figure 2 also appear to show more connections than the 'immediate preceding and subsequent levels' described in the text. Please align the equations, pseudocode, and figure with the actual implementation.
minor comments (7)
- [Abstract; §4; Table 1] The dataset size is reported inconsistently: the abstract and Table 1 state 16,212 images, while §4 states 16,214 images. Please unify these numbers.
- [§1] There is a typo in the introduction: 'Sgementation' should be 'Segmentation'.
- [§3.3; Figure 2] Figure 2 depicts dense full-scale connections, but the text says the implementation uses only immediate neighboring levels. Please clarify which connections are actually used and ensure the figure and text do not contradict each other.
- [§5.3, Table 4] The ablation claims that HSA improves average Dice by 1.1% and FS by 1.3%, but the numbers in Table 4 are per-class and the 'Total' row is not an additive combination of the individual components. Please specify how the average is computed and clarify whether the reported improvements are averaged over all six classes.
- [§5, Tables 2-3] The F1 metric is never defined. Please state whether it is the per-class F1 score and how it is computed from precision and recall.
- [Figure 6] Figure 6 is captioned 'Bbox plot' but no explanation of what the box plot shows is provided in the text. Please add a description or remove the figure.
- [§7] Section 7, titled 'New or Breakthrough Work to be Presented', is an unusual section for a journal-style paper and mostly repeats the conclusion. It should be removed or integrated into the conclusion.
Circularity Check
No significant circularity: the paper is an empirical architecture comparison with self-contained evaluations on its own dataset.
full rationale
This paper does not present a formal derivation whose conclusion is encoded in its premises. The reported results are measured Dice and F1 scores on held-out test subsets of the LRV dataset, and the method is an architectural combination of full-scale skip connections and hierarchical soft attention gates. The equations in Section 3 define the network operations (skip connections, attention weights, resampling, and gradient adjustment); none of these equations is later used to compute the reported segmentation accuracies, so there is no fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. The Omni-Seg baseline is cited from prior work with overlapping authors and also serves as the 'Base' row in the ablation study, but this is a standard baseline comparison, not a load-bearing self-citation: the central claim is that adding HSA and FS to that baseline improves the measured scores, which is an empirical claim tested on held-out data. There is no uniqueness theorem, no imported ansatz that smuggles in the conclusion, and no renaming of a known result as a new framework. The labeling methodology's decision to assign each pixel a single class and to avoid co-labeling artery with its subcomponents is a task-definition assumption; it may raise questions about anatomical consistency or external validity, but it does not make the reported comparisons circular. The lack of an external benchmark is a generalizability concern, not a circularity concern.
Assumptions & free parameters
free parameters (1)
- Network hyperparameters (channels, levels, kernel size) =
not fully specified
assumptions (4)
- domain assumption Manual expert annotations are correct ground truth
- ad hoc to paper Single-label-per-pixel annotation is valid for multi-class training
- domain assumption Patches from the same subject are independent
- standard math Standard deep learning training assumptions
Cite this review
Pith. "Pith review of Towards Fine-grained Renal Vasculature Segmentation: Full-Scale Hierarchical Learning with FH-Seg." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/VOUODPIZ
@misc{pith2026250205320,
author = {Pith},
title = {Pith review of: Towards Fine-grained Renal Vasculature Segmentation: Full-Scale Hierarchical Learning with FH-Seg},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/VOUODPIZ}},
note = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.05320}
}
read the original abstract
Accurate fine-grained segmentation of the renal vasculature is critical for nephrological analysis, yet it faces challenges due to diverse and insufficiently annotated images. Existing methods struggle to accurately segment intricate regions of the renal vasculature, such as the inner and outer walls, arteries and lesions. In this paper, we introduce FH-Seg, a Full-scale Hierarchical Learning Framework designed for comprehensive segmentation of the renal vasculature. Specifically, FH-Seg employs full-scale skip connections that merge detailed anatomical information with contextual semantics across scales, effectively bridging the gap between structural and pathological contexts. Additionally, we implement a learnable hierarchical soft attention gates to adaptively reduce interference from non-core information, enhancing the focus on critical vascular features. To advance research on renal pathology segmentation, we also developed a Large Renal Vasculature (LRV) dataset, which contains 16,212 fine-grained annotated images of 5,600 renal arteries. Extensive experiments on the LRV dataset demonstrate FH-Seg's superior accuracies (71.23% Dice, 73.06% F1), outperforming Omni-Seg by 2.67 and 2.13 percentage points respectively. Code is available at: https://github.com/hrlblab/FH-seg.
Figures
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Reference graph
Works this paper leans on
-
[1]
Building robust pathology image analyses with uncertainty quantification,
Gomes, J., Kong, J., Kurc, T., Melo, A. C., Ferreira, R., Saltz, J. H., and Teodoro, G., “Building robust pathology image analyses with uncertainty quantification,” Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine 208, 106291 (2021)
work page 2021
-
[2]
Marti-Aguado, D., Rodr ´ ıguez-Ortega, A., Mestre-Alagarda, C., Bauza, M., Valero-P´ erez, E., Alfaro- Cervello, C., Benlloch, S., P´ erez-Rojas, J., Ferr´ andez, A., Alemany-Monraval, P., et al., “Digital pathology: accurate technique for quantitative assessment of histological features in metabolic-associated fatty liver disease,” Alimentary Pharmacolog...
work page 2021
-
[3]
U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmen- tation,
Ronneberger, O., Fischer, P., and Brox, T., “U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmen- tation,” in [Medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention–MICCAI 2015: 18th international conference, Munich, Germany, October 5-9, 2015, proceedings, part III 18 ], 234–241, Springer (2015)
work page 2015
-
[4]
Attention u-net: Learning where to look for the pancreas,
Oktay, O., Schlemper, J., Folgoc, L. L., Lee, M., Heinrich, M., Misawa, K., Mori, K., McDonagh, S., Hammerla, N. Y., Kainz, B., et al., “Attention u-net: Learning where to look for the pancreas,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1804.03999 (2018)
arXiv 2018
-
[5]
Unet 3+: A full-scale connected unet for medical image segmentation,
Huang, H., Lin, L., Tong, R., Hu, H., Zhang, Q., Iwamoto, Y., Han, X., Chen, Y.-W., and Wu, J., “Unet 3+: A full-scale connected unet for medical image segmentation,” in [ ICASSP 2020-2020 IEEE international conference on acoustics, speech and signal processing (ICASSP) ], 1055–1059, IEEE (2020)
work page 2020
-
[6]
Jayapandian, C. P., Chen, Y., Janowczyk, A. R., Palmer, M. B., Cassol, C. A., Sekulic, M., Hodgin, J. B., Zee, J., Hewitt, S. M., O’Toole, J., et al., “Development and evaluation of deep learning–based segmentation of histologic structures in the kidney cortex with multiple histologic stains,” Kidney international 99(1), 86–101 (2021)
work page 2021
-
[7]
Lutnick, B., Ginley, B., Govind, D., McGarry, S. D., LaViolette, P. S., Yacoub, R., Jain, S., Tomaszewski, J. E., Jen, K.-Y., and Sarder, P., “An integrated iterative annotation technique for easing neural network training in medical image analysis,” Nature machine intelligence 1(2), 112–119 (2019)
work page 2019
-
[8]
Swin unetr: Swin transformers for semantic segmentation of brain tumors in mri images,
Hatamizadeh, A., Nath, V., Tang, Y., Yang, D., Roth, H. R., and Xu, D., “Swin unetr: Swin transformers for semantic segmentation of brain tumors in mri images,” in [International MICCAI brainlesion workshop ], 272–284, Springer (2021)
work page 2021
Show all 33 references
-
[9]
Dense biased networks with deep priori anatomy and hard region adaptation: Semi-supervised learning for fine renal artery segmentation,
He, Y., Yang, G., Yang, J., Chen, Y., Kong, Y., Wu, J., Tang, L., Zhu, X., Dillenseger, J.-L., Shao, P., et al., “Dense biased networks with deep priori anatomy and hard region adaptation: Semi-supervised learning for fine renal artery segmentation,” Medical image analysis 63,...
2020
-
[10]
Mo077 automatic segmentation of arteries, arterioles and glomeruli in native biopsies with thrombotic microangiopathy and other vascular diseases,
Lutnick, B., Moos, K., Seshan, S. V., Kers, J., Roelofs, J., Hellmich, M., Sciascia, S., Cicalese, P. A., Ginley, B., Sarder, P., et al., “Mo077 automatic segmentation of arteries, arterioles and glomeruli in native biopsies with thrombotic microangiopathy and other vascular d...
2021
-
[11]
An evaluation of u-net in renal structure segmentation,
Wang, H., Huang, Z., Ye, J., Tu, C., Yang, Y., Du, S., Deng, Z., Ma, C., Niu, J., and He, J., “An evaluation of u-net in renal structure segmentation,” ArXiv abs/2209.02247 (2022)
2022 arXiv
-
[12]
Meta grayscale adaptive network for 3d integrated renal structures segmentation,
He, Y., Yang, G., Yang, J., Ge, R., Kong, Y., Zhu, X., Zhang, S., Shao, P., Shu, H., Dillenseger, J.-L., et al., “Meta grayscale adaptive network for 3d integrated renal structures segmentation,” Medical image analysis 71, 102055 (2021)
2021
-
[13]
A hybrid approach to full-scale reconstruction of renal arterial network,
Xu, P., Holstein-Rathlou, N.-H., Søgaard, S. B., Gundlach, C., Sørensen, C. M., Erleben, K., Sosnovtseva, O., and Darkner, S., “A hybrid approach to full-scale reconstruction of renal arterial network,” Scientific Reports 13(1), 7569 (2023)
2023
-
[14]
Cor- tical thickness: an early morphological marker of atherosclerotic renal disease,
Mounier-Vehier, C., Lions, C., Devos, P., Jaboureck, O., Willoteaux, S., Carre, A., and Beregi, J.-P., “Cor- tical thickness: an early morphological marker of atherosclerotic renal disease,” Kidney international 61(2), 591–598 (2002)
2002
-
[15]
Acute kidney injury,
Bellomo, R., Kellum, J. A., and Ronco, C., “Acute kidney injury,” The Lancet 380(9843), 756–766 (2012)
2012
-
[16]
Mast cell quantification in normal peritoneum and during peritoneal dialysis treatment,
Jim´ enez-Heffernan, J., Bajo, M. A., Perna, C., del Peso, G., Larrubia, J. R., Gamallo, C., S´ anchez-Tomero, J., L´ opez-Cabrera, M., and Selgas, R., “Mast cell quantification in normal peritoneum and during peritoneal dialysis treatment,” Archives of pathology & laboratory ...
2006
-
[17]
Omni-seg: A scale-aware dynamic network for renal pathological image segmentation,
Deng, R., Liu, Q., Cui, C., Yao, T., Long, J., Asad, Z., Womick, R. M., Zhu, Z., Fogo, A. B., Zhao, S., Yang, H., and Huo, Y., “Omni-seg: A scale-aware dynamic network for renal pathological image segmentation,” IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering 70(9), 2636–2644 (2023)
2023
-
[18]
Cpp-unet: Combined pyramid pooling modules in the u-net network for kidney, tumor and cyst segmentation,
Matos, C. E. F., Junior, G. B., de Almeida, J. D. S., and de Paiva, A. C., “Cpp-unet: Combined pyramid pooling modules in the u-net network for kidney, tumor and cyst segmentation,” IEEE Latin America Transactions 22(8), 642–650 (2024)
2024
-
[19]
Rasnet: Renal automatic segmentation using an improved u-net with multi-scale perception and attention unit,
Cao, G., Sun, Z., Wang, C., Geng, H., Fu, H., Yin, Z., and Pan, M., “Rasnet: Renal automatic segmentation using an improved u-net with multi-scale perception and attention unit,” Pattern Recognition 150, 110336 (2024)
2024
-
[20]
Ma-unet: An improved version of unet based on multi-scale and attention mechanism for medical image segmentation,
Cai, Y. and Wang, Y., “Ma-unet: An improved version of unet based on multi-scale and attention mechanism for medical image segmentation,” in [ Third international conference on electronics and communication; network and computer technology (ECNCT 2021) ], 12167, 205–211, SPIE (2022)
2022
-
[21]
Karpinski score under digital investigation: a fully automated segmentation algorithm to identify vascular and stromal injury of donors’ kidneys,
Salvi, M., Mogetta, A., Meiburger, K. M., Gambella, A., Molinaro, L., Barreca, A., Papotti, M., and Molinari, F., “Karpinski score under digital investigation: a fully automated segmentation algorithm to identify vascular and stromal injury of donors’ kidneys,” Electronics 9(1...
2020
-
[22]
Ai applications in renal pathology,
Huo, Y., Deng, R., Liu, Q., Fogo, A. B., and Yang, H., “Ai applications in renal pathology,” Kidney international 99(6), 1309–1320 (2021)
2021
-
[23]
Artificial intelligence in renal pathology: current status and future,
Feng, C. and Liu, F., “Artificial intelligence in renal pathology: current status and future,” Biomolecules and Biomedicine 23(2), 225 (2023)
2023
-
[24]
Evaluating tubulointerstitial compartments in renal biopsy speci- mens using a deep learning-based approach for classifying normal and abnormal tubules,
Hara, S., Haneda, E., Kawakami, M., Morita, K., Nishioka, R., Zoshima, T., Kometani, M., Yoneda, T., Kawano, M., Karashima, S., et al., “Evaluating tubulointerstitial compartments in renal biopsy speci- mens using a deep learning-based approach for classifying normal and abnor...
2022
-
[25]
Glomerulosclerosis iden- tification in whole slide images using semantic segmentation,
Bueno, G., Fernandez-Carrobles, M. M., Gonzalez-Lopez, L., and Deniz, O., “Glomerulosclerosis iden- tification in whole slide images using semantic segmentation,” Computer methods and programs in biomedicine 184, 105273 (2020)
2020
-
[26]
Automated assessment of glomerulosclerosis and tubular atrophy using deep learning,
Salvi, M., Mogetta, A., Gambella, A., Molinaro, L., Barreca, A., Papotti, M., and Molinari, F., “Automated assessment of glomerulosclerosis and tubular atrophy using deep learning,” Computerized Medical Imaging and Graphics 90, 101930 (2021)
2021
-
[27]
Deep learning–based segmentation and quantification in experimental kidney histopathology,
Bouteldja, N., Klinkhammer, B. M., B¨ ulow, R. D., Droste, P., Otten, S. W., Von Stillfried, S. F., Moellmann, J., Sheehan, S. M., Korstanje, R., Menzel, S., et al., “Deep learning–based segmentation and quantification in experimental kidney histopathology,” Journal of the Ame...
2021
-
[28]
Smu-net: Style matching u-net for brain tumor segmentation with missing modalities,
Azad, R., Khosravi, N., and Merhof, D., “Smu-net: Style matching u-net for brain tumor segmentation with missing modalities,” in [ International Conference on Medical Imaging with Deep Learning ], 48–62, PMLR (2022)
2022
-
[29]
Ma-net: A multi-scale attention network for liver and tumor segmentation,
Fan, T., Wang, G., Li, Y., and Wang, H., “Ma-net: A multi-scale attention network for liver and tumor segmentation,” IEEE Access 8, 179656–179665 (2020)
2020
-
[30]
Sa-unet: Spatial attention u-net for retinal vessel segmentation,
Guo, C., Szemenyei, M., Yi, Y., Wang, W., Chen, B., and Fan, C., “Sa-unet: Spatial attention u-net for retinal vessel segmentation,” in [ 2020 25th international conference on pattern recognition (ICPR) ], 1236–1242, IEEE (2021)
2021
-
[31]
Deep frequency re- calibration u-net for medical image segmentation,
Azad, R., Bozorgpour, A., Asadi-Aghbolaghi, M., Merhof, D., and Escalera, S., “Deep frequency re- calibration u-net for medical image segmentation,” in [ Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Confer- ence on Computer Vision ], 3274–3283 (2021)
2021
-
[32]
Omni-seg: A scale-aware dynamic network for renal pathological image segmentation,
Deng, R., Liu, Q., Cui, C., Yao, T., Long, J., and Asad, Z., “Omni-seg: A scale-aware dynamic network for renal pathological image segmentation,” IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering 70(9), 2636–2644 (2023)
2023
-
[33]
Unet++: A nested u-net architecture for medical image segmentation,
Zhou, Z., Rahman Siddiquee, M. M., Tajbakhsh, N., and Liang, J., “Unet++: A nested u-net architecture for medical image segmentation,” in [ Deep Learning in Medical Image Analysis and Multimodal Learning for Clinical Decision Support: 4th International Workshop, DLMIA 2018, an...
2018
Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.