Paper detail

Optimization in Sparse 2D to Dense 3D Weakly Supervised Learning: Application to Multi-Label Segmentation of Large ex vivo MRI Data

INTRODUCTION | Fully supervised 3D segmentation of high-resolution ex vivo MRI is limited by the prohibitive cost of volumetric annotation, forcing reliance on sparse 2D slices. Weakly supervised Sparse-to-Dense frameworks bridge this gap, but guidelines remain ambiguous regarding human-centric visual enhancements and transferring optimization strategies across dimensions. We analyze divergent regularization needs for multi-class segmentation of high-resolution ex vivo spinal cord MRI. METHODS | We used 9.4T MRI of multiple sclerosis spinal cords (>104,000 slices) with sparse annotations (428 slices). A 2D Teacher trained on sparse slices generated dense pseudo-labels to train a 3D Student. We systematically evaluated the impact of human-centric preprocessing, spatial augmentation, and soft-label regularization on both architectures. RESULTS | We identified a critical divergence in training dynamics. The 2D Teacher required strong spatial augmentation and soft-labeling to overcome data scarcity, improving White Matter Lesion Dice scores by >11 points. However, propagating these techniques to the 3D Student degraded its performance. Furthermore, human-centric preprocessing (e.g., CLAHE) disrupted global statistical cues, dropping Gray Matter Lesion Dice scores by ~25 points. DISCUSSION | Our study highlights a perception divergence (human-centric contrast enhancement harms machine models) and a regularization conflict across dimensions. 3D architectures trained on dense pseudo-labels exhibit fundamentally different optimization landscapes than 2D counterparts and require distinct, conservative regularization. Code and models: https://github.com/ivadomed/model_seg_sc-gm-lesion_human_ms_exvivo_t2star.

preprint2026arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.