Jongmin Shin

Jongmin Shin, Enki Cho, Ka Young Kim et al.

Surgical scene understanding is crucial for computer-assisted intervention systems, requiring visual comprehension of surgical scenes that involves diverse elements such as surgical tools, anatomical structures, and their interactions. To effectively represent the complex information in surgical scenes, graph-based approaches have been explored to structurally model surgical entities and their relationships. Previous surgical scene graph studies have demonstrated the feasibility of representing surgical scenes using graphs. However, certain aspects of surgical scenes-such as diverse combinations of tool-action-target and the identity of the hand operating the tool-remain underexplored in graph-based representations, despite their importance. To incorporate these aspects into graph representations, we propose Endoscapes-SG201 dataset, which includes annotations for tool-action-target combinations and hand identity. We also introduce SSG-Com, a graph-based method designed to learn and represent these critical elements. Through experiments on downstream tasks such as critical view of safety assessment and action triplet recognition, we demonstrated the importance of integrating these essential scene graph components, highlighting their significant contribution to surgical scene understanding. The code and dataset are available at https://github.com/ailab-kyunghee/SSG-Com

Jongmin Shin, Ka Young Kim, Eunki Cho et al.

Purpose: Vision-language models (VLMs) have shown promising performance in surgical visual question answering (VQA). However, existing surgical VQA datasets often contain linguistic shortcuts, where question phrasing implicitly constrains the answer space. It remains unclear whether reported performance reflects visual understanding or reliance on such linguistic shortcuts. Methods: We introduce SurgCheck, a diagnostic benchmark for quantifying linguistic shortcut reliance in surgical VQA. SurgCheck employs a paired-question design in which each surgical frame is associated with an original question containing entity names and a less-biased counterpart that removes these names while preserving identical visual content and ground-truth answers. The resulting performance gap provides a diagnostic signal of shortcut reliance. To ensure that the less-biased question remains well-defined even without entity names, four grounding cues are incorporated: bounding box, arrow, spatial position, and periphrasis. We evaluate both general-purpose and surgical-specific VLMs under zero-shot and fine-tuned settings on SurgCheck. To evaluate open-ended zero-shot responses, we introduce an LLM-as-a-judge evaluation protocol. Results: Using SurgCheck, we observe consistent performance degradation on less-biased questions across five VLMs, despite identical visual inputs. Text-only ablation reveals minimal performance drops for action and target prediction, indicating that action and target prediction is largely driven by linguistic shortcuts rather than visual reasoning. Conclusion: SurgCheck provides a controlled diagnostic framework that exposes failure modes masked by linguistic bias in existing surgical VQA benchmarks. Our findings demonstrate that strong benchmark performance does not necessarily imply faithful visual understanding, underscoring the need for bias-aware evaluation in surgical VQA.