Meritxell Riera-Marín

Meritxell Riera-Marín, Javier García López, Júlia Rodríguez-Comas et al.

Objective: Accurate probability estimates are essential for the safe deployment of medical image segmentation models in clinical decision-making. However, modern deep segmentation networks are often poorly calibrated, a problem exacerbated when multiple expert annotations exhibit substantial disagreement. While inter-rater variability is typically treated as noise, it provides valuable information about intrinsic annotation ambiguity that must be reflected in model confidence. Methods: We improve the probabilistic calibration of medical image segmentation models by reformulating multi-rater supervision as an ordinal learning problem. Voxel-wise annotator agreement is treated as an ordered target, linking predictive confidence to the empirical variability in training data. This formulation allows the use of ordinal-aware scoring rules, such as the Ranked Probability Score ordinal loss, combined with a standard binary objective to preserve discriminative performance. Results: We evaluated the proposed approach across four public segmentation benchmarks spanning ophthalmology, histopathology, and thoracic imaging. Calibration was assessed using a multi-rater extension of expected calibration error. Results consistently show that ordinal-aware training yields substantially improved calibration with respect to inter-rater agreement without degrading segmentation accuracy. Conclusions: Treating multi-rater annotations as ordered information provides a principled and architecture-agnostic route to more reliable probabilistic segmentation models.

Sikha O K, Meritxell Riera-Marín, Adrian Galdran et al.

Image segmentation is a critical step in computational biomedical image analysis, typically evaluated using metrics like the Dice coefficient during training and validation. However, in clinical settings without manual annotations, assessing segmentation quality becomes challenging, and models lacking reliability indicators face adoption barriers. To address this gap, we propose a novel framework for predicting segmentation quality without requiring ground truth annotations during test time. Our approach introduces two complementary frameworks: one leveraging predicted segmentation and uncertainty maps, and another integrating the original input image, uncertainty maps, and predicted segmentation maps. We present Bayesian adaptations of two benchmark segmentation models-SwinUNet and Feature Pyramid Network with ResNet50-using Monte Carlo Dropout, Ensemble, and Test Time Augmentation to quantify uncertainty. We evaluate four uncertainty estimates: confidence map, entropy, mutual information, and expected pairwise Kullback-Leibler divergence on 2D skin lesion and 3D liver segmentation datasets, analyzing their correlation with segmentation quality metrics. Our framework achieves an R2 score of 93.25 and Pearson correlation of 96.58 on the HAM10000 dataset, outperforming previous segmentation quality assessment methods. For 3D liver segmentation, Test Time Augmentation with entropy achieves an R2 score of 85.03 and a Pearson correlation of 65.02, demonstrating cross-modality robustness. Additionally, we propose an aggregation strategy that combines multiple uncertainty estimates into a single score per image, offering a more robust and comprehensive assessment of segmentation quality. Finally, we use Grad-CAM and UMAP-based embedding analysis to interpret the model's behavior and reliability, highlighting the impact of uncertainty integration.

Meritxell Riera-Marin, Sikha O K, Julia Rodriguez-Comas et al.

Deep learning (DL) has become the dominant approach for medical image segmentation, yet ensuring the reliability and clinical applicability of these models requires addressing key challenges such as annotation variability, calibration, and uncertainty estimation. This is why we created the Calibration and Uncertainty for multiRater Volume Assessment in multiorgan Segmentation (CURVAS), which highlights the critical role of multiple annotators in establishing a more comprehensive ground truth, emphasizing that segmentation is inherently subjective and that leveraging inter-annotator variability is essential for robust model evaluation. Seven teams participated in the challenge, submitting a variety of DL models evaluated using metrics such as Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC), Expected Calibration Error (ECE), and Continuous Ranked Probability Score (CRPS). By incorporating consensus and dissensus ground truth, we assess how DL models handle uncertainty and whether their confidence estimates align with true segmentation performance. Our findings reinforce the importance of well-calibrated models, as better calibration is strongly correlated with the quality of the results. Furthermore, we demonstrate that segmentation models trained on diverse datasets and enriched with pre-trained knowledge exhibit greater robustness, particularly in cases deviating from standard anatomical structures. Notably, the best-performing models achieved high DSC and well-calibrated uncertainty estimates. This work underscores the need for multi-annotator ground truth, thorough calibration assessments, and uncertainty-aware evaluations to develop trustworthy and clinically reliable DL-based medical image segmentation models.