CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 2Medical Image Segmentation TechniquesAdvanced Neural Network ApplicationsRetinal Imaging and Analysis

rNCA: Self-Repairing Segmentation Masks

Open access
Silbernagel, Malte, Alonso, Albert, Petersen, Jens, Ibragimov, Bulat, de Bruijne, Marleen, Wyburd, Madeleine K.·2025·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2512.13397arXiv 2512.13397
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Accurately predicting topologically correct masks remains a difficult task for general segmentation models, which often produce fragmented or disconnected outputs. Fixing these artifacts typically requires hand-crafted refinement rules or architectures specialized to a particular task. Here, we show that Neural Cellular Automata (NCA) can be directly re-purposed as an effective refinement mechanism, using local, iterative updates guided by image context to repair segmentation masks. By training on imperfect masks and ground truths, the automaton learns the structural properties of the target shape while relying solely on local information. When applied to coarse, globally predicted masks, the learned dynamics progressively reconnect broken regions, prune loose fragments and converge towards stable, topologically consistent results. We show how refinement NCA (rNCA) can be easily applied to repair common topological errors produced by different base segmentation models and tasks: for fragmented retinal vessels, it yields 2-3% gains in Dice/clDice and improves Betti errors, reducing $β_0$ errors by 60% and $β_1$ by 20%; for myocardium, it repairs 61.5% of broken cases in a zero-shot setting while lowering ASSD and HD by 19% and 16%, respectively. This showcases NCA as effective and broadly applicable refiners.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

rNCA repurposes neural cellular automata as a plug-in, local iterative refiner that repairs topological errors in segmentation masks without retraining the base model. Across liver, retinal vessel, and myocardium tasks it improves overlap/topology metrics and generalizes from UNet to Swin, while failing on severely broken or ambiguous inputs.

Key findings

  • On DRIVE retinal vessels, rNCA improves UNet Dice from 0.761 to 0.777 and clDice from 0.802 to 0.820, while reducing Δβ0 from 0.965 to 0.532 and Δβ1 from 1.366 to 1.094; on unseen Swin predictions it improves Dice from 0.767 to 0.776, clDice from 0.804 to 0.816, Δβ0 from 1.547 to 0.646, and Δβ1 from 1.253 to 1.122. The abstract summarizes this as 2–3% Dice/clDice gains, with β0 errors reduced by 60% and β1 by 20%.
  • On ACDC myocardium, the abstract reports rNCA repairs 61.5% of broken cases in a zero-shot setting while lowering ASSD and HD by 19% and 16%, respectively. In the broken Swin subset, topology improves from 0/13 to 8/13, HD from 7.09 to 5.98, and ASSD from 2.01 to 1.63; in the broken UNet subset, topology improves from 0/8 to 2/8.
  • On CHAOS-CT liver filling, rNCA raises Dice from 0.80 to 0.98, improves ASSD from 0.67 to 0.08, and reduces HD from 10.5 to 4.3; morphological reconstruction reaches Dice 0.96, ASSD 0.19, and HD 7.57, but over-segments tight folds where rNCA preserves geometry.
  • rNCA uses 12,048 parameters and runs at 2.48 ms/image on GPU (0.039 ms/iter) and 75.20 ms/image on CPU (1.17 ms/iter). Ablations show K=16, N=2, T=64 works well; K=1, T=16, or replacing the whole batch (N=B) degrades stability/performance.

Methods

  • rNCA is an NCA refiner: each pixel has a K-channel state (K=16), with the first channel as the visible mask; local perception uses 3×3 convolutions for state and image, concatenated and passed to a two-layer MLP transition (hidden width 128). Updates are additive, with alive-pixel masking and stochastic update skipping (τ=0.5).
  • Training uses a sample pool of 256 states, batch size 32, replacing N=2 states per iteration, unrolling 64 steps, and computing MSE at a randomly sampled late step t*∼U(32,64) against ground truth. It is trained on imperfect masks: synthetic corruptions for liver/ACDC, and UNet predictions for DRIVE.
  • Evaluation covers CHAOS-CT liver, DRIVE retinal vessels, and ACDC myocardium, using Dice, clDice, ASSD, HD, and Betti-number deviations. Baselines include SegFix, SegRefiner, DenseCRF, a conditional UNet refiner, TopoLoss, and TEDS-Net.

Limitations

  • Stated: local dynamics cannot recover too-broken initial states that require long-range reasoning; ambiguous images may lack sufficient local context; training is more complex/slower due to iterative NCA dynamics; particularly poor initial masks cannot be effectively repaired.
  • Stated future work: extending beyond proof-of-concept, refining volumetric data, and designing more general refiners for multiple error types.
  • Evident from the text: evaluation is limited to 2D tasks and specific datasets (CHAOS-CT, DRIVE, ACDC), with synthetic perturbations for liver and myocardium; DRIVE is small (20 images); some metrics worsen in subsets (e.g., UNet broken myocardium ASSD 2.96→3.27; full myocardium UNet ASSD 0.81→0.83).

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2512.13397

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

10 of 18 cited sources checked · 5 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

  • Premisecitation
    § Abstract · p. 1

    General segmentation models often fail to preserve topological correctness, producing fragmented or disconnected masks.

    “Accurately predicting topologically correct masks remains a difficult task for general segmentation models, which often produce fragmented or disconnected outputs.”
    • Also stated in: § 1 Introduction · p. 2 · plain
      “Modern segmentation networks achieve strong pixel- and voxel-level accuracy across medical tasks, but often fail to preserve topological correctness when dealing with thin branches, closures, and continuity [1-5].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim3 of 5 sources checked
    • cites [1] [1] Jonathan Long, Evan Shelhamer, and Trevor Darrell. Fully Convolutional Networks for Semantic Segmentation. In IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , pages 3431-3440, 2015. - source

      Section 4.2 (p. 5) says that some segmentation outputs are coarse and lack spatial detail, but it does not discuss whether their masks are topologically correct. The Results (p. 8) describe fine structures recovered by the authors’ model, not a tendency of general models to produce fragmented or disconnected masks. Searches for topology, connectivity, fragmentation, and disconnection found no passage addressing the attributed claim. (LLM, conf=0.76)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [2] [2] Olaf Ronneberger, Philipp Fischer, and Thomas Brox. U-Net: Convolutional Networks for Biomedical Image Segmentation. In Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention (MICCAI) , volume 9351, pages 234-241, 2015. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-24574-4\_28. - source

      The Introduction (p. 3) identifies separating touching cells as a challenge in biomedical segmentation, and Training (p. 4) describes a loss designed to learn their borders. This supports a narrower difficulty with separating objects, but the paper does not say that general segmentation models often produce fragmented or disconnected masks or fail to preserve topology. (LLM, conf=0.77)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [3] [3] Zilong Huang, Xinggang Wang, Lichao Huang, Chang Huang, Yunchao Wei, and Wenyu Liu. CCNet: Criss-Cross Attention for Semantic Segmentation. In IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) , pages 603-612, 2019. doi: 10.1109/ICCV.2019.00069. - source
    • cites [4] [4] Yuhui Yuan, Xilin Chen, and Jingdong Wang. Object-Contextual Representations for Semantic Segmentation. In European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV) , volume 12351, pages 173-190, 2020. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-58539-6\_11. - source
    • cites [5] [5] Ze Liu, Yutong Lin, Yue Cao, Han Hu, Yixuan Wei, Zheng Zhang, Stephen Lin, and Baining Guo. Swin Transformer: Hierarchical Vision Transformer Using Shifted Windows. In IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) , pages 10012-10022, 2021. doi: 10.1109/ICCV48922.2021.00986. - source

      Section 4.3 (page unavailable) describes the ADE20K segmentation benchmark, and Section 4.2 reports mask accuracy, but neither addresses topological correctness or fragmented and disconnected masks. Further searches for those terms and for structural continuity found no passage supporting the attributed claim. (LLM, conf=0.76)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Premisecitation
    § Abstract · p. 1

    Fixing topological artifacts typically requires handcrafted refinement rules or architectures specialized to a particular task.

    “Fixing these artifacts typically requires handcrafted refinement rules or architectures specialized to a particular task.”
    • Also stated in: § 1 Introduction · p. 2 · plain
      “Classical post-processing methods promote local smoothness but struggle to repair complex topology [16, 17], while learned refiners, such as CRF-RNN [18], integrate similar operations into an end-to-end framework, yet remain limited to local consistency rather than topological repair.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [16] [16] Yuri Y. Boykov and Marie-Pierre Jolly. Interactive Graph Cuts for Optimal Boundary & Region Segmentation of Objects in N-D Images. In IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) , pages 105-112, 2001. doi: 10.1109/ICCV.2001.937505. - source
    • cites [17] [17] Pierre Soille et al. Morphological image analysis: principles and applications , volume 2. Springer, 1999. - source
    • cites [18] [18] Shuai Zheng, Sadeep Jayasumana, Bernardino Romera-Paredes, Vibhav Vineet, Zhizhong Su, Dalong Du, Chang Huang, and Philip H. S. Torr. Conditional Random Fields as Recurrent Neural Networks. In IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) , pages 1529-1537, 2015. doi: 10.1109/ICCV.2015.179. - source

      The Introduction (p. 1) describes blurry boundaries and spurious regions in CNN segmentation outputs, and Related Work (p. 2) describes CRF refinement and alternative network designs. The paper does not say that fixing these artifacts typically requires handcrafted rules or task-specialized architectures; it presents an end-to-end trainable CNN–CRF approach instead. (LLM, conf=0.78)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Premisecitation
    § D Experiments: Myocardium · p. 22

    TEDS-Net requires explicit prior knowledge of the anatomical topology.

    “TEDS-Net requires explicit prior knowledge of the anatomical topology.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [10] [10] Madeleine K Wyburd, Nicola K Dinsdale, Ana IL Namburete, and Mark Jenkinson. TEDS-Net: enforcing diffeomorphisms in spatial transformers to guarantee topology preservation in segmentations. In International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention , pages 250-260, 2021. - source
  • Findingown data
    § Abstract · p. 1

    For myocardium, rNCA lowers HD by 16%.

    “while lowering ASSD and HD by 19% and 16%, respectively.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingreasoning
    § C Experiments: Retinal Vessels (DRIVE) · p. 20

    Increasing roll-out time to T=128 did not improve performance much.

    “Increasing roll-out time ( T = 128 ) furthermore did not seem to improve the performance much as rNCA already reaches a steady state solution with less memory cost.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 27
  • May combine two claims. 36
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 6

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § D Experiments: Myocardium · p. 22

    TEDS-Net is a spatial transformer network that learns a topology-preserving deformation field and warps a prior shape of known topology to each input.

    “The second is TEDS-Net [10], a spatial transformer network that learns a topology-preserving deformation field and warps a prior shape of known topology to each input.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [10] [10] Madeleine K Wyburd, Nicola K Dinsdale, Ana IL Namburete, and Mark Jenkinson. TEDS-Net: enforcing diffeomorphisms in spatial transformers to guarantee topology preservation in segmentations. In International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention , pages 250-260, 2021. - source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation
    § D Experiments: Myocardium · p. 21

    The ACDC dataset was used for myocardium segmentation.

    “For myocardium segmentation, we used the ACDC dataset [47].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [47] [47] Olivier Bernard, Alain Lalande, Clement Zotti, Frederick Cervenansky, Xin Yang, Pheng-Ann Heng, Irem Cetin, Karim Lekadir, Oscar Camara, Miguel Angel Gonzalez Ballester, et al. Deep learning techniques for automatic mri cardiac multi-structures segmentation and diagnosis: is the problem solved? IEEE transactions on medical imaging , 37(11):2514-2525, 2018. - source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § D Experiments: Myocardium · p. 22

    The base segmentation models used published predictions from Swin-UNETR and UNet.

    “For the base segmentation models, we used the published predictions from transformer based Swin-UNETR [49] and UNet [2].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [49] [49] Hu Cao, Yueyue Wang, Joy Chen, Dongsheng Jiang, Xiaopeng Zhang, Qi Tian, and Manning Wang. Swin-unet: Unet-like pure transformer for medical image segmentation. In European conference on computer vision , pages 205-218, 2022. source
    • cites [2] [2] Olaf Ronneberger, Philipp Fischer, and Thomas Brox. U-Net: Convolutional Networks for Biomedical Image Segmentation. In Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention (MICCAI) , volume 9351, pages 234-241, 2015. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-24574-4\_28. - source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § D Experiments: Myocardium · p. 21

    The ACDC dataset contains two labelled 3D cardiac scans from 100 patients.

    “This dataset contains two labelled 3D cardiac scans from 100 patients.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [47] [47] Olivier Bernard, Alain Lalande, Clement Zotti, Frederick Cervenansky, Xin Yang, Pheng-Ann Heng, Irem Cetin, Karim Lekadir, Oscar Camara, Miguel Angel Gonzalez Ballester, et al. Deep learning techniques for automatic mri cardiac multi-structures segmentation and diagnosis: is the problem solved? IEEE transactions on medical imaging , 37(11):2514-2525, 2018. - source

      The Evaluation Framework (section III, page unavailable) says that the 100-patient training set provides manual references for end-diastolic and end-systolic images. It also says ACDC includes 50 test patients, whose manual references are kept private. The claim describes the labelled training set but omits that qualification, making 100 sound like the size of the full dataset. (LLM, conf=0.86)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § D Experiments: Myocardium · p. 22

    All model implementations and predictions follow the descriptions provided in [6].

    “All model implementations and predictions follow the descriptions provided in [6].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [6] [6] Madeleine K Wyburd, Nicola K Dinsdale, Mark Jenkinson, and Ana IL Namburete. Anatomically plausible segmentations: Explicitly preserving topology through prior deformations. Medical Image Analysis , 97:103222, 2024. - source

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 4.1 Fill the Gaps · p. 6

    rNCA restores missing regions while preserving the underlying object geometry.

    “As seen in Figure 3, rNCA restores missing regions while preserving the underlying object geometry.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 4.1 Fill the Gaps · p. 6

    rNCA improves ASSD from 0.67 to 0.08, a 58% improvement compared to morphological operations.

    “rNCA improves ASSD from 0 . 67 to 0 . 08 and HD decreases from 10 . 5 to 4 . 3 , a 58% and 43% improvement compared to morphological operations.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 4.1 Fill the Gaps · p. 6

    rNCA decreases HD from 10.5 to 4.3, a 43% improvement compared to morphological operations.

    “rNCA improves ASSD from 0 . 67 to 0 . 08 and HD decreases from 10 . 5 to 4 . 3 , a 58% and 43% improvement compared to morphological operations.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given
    § 4.2 Bridge the Gaps · p. 7

    Despite being trained solely on UNet outputs, the refiner generalizes well and similarly improves masks generated by Swin.

    “Despite being trained solely on UNet outputs, the refiner generalizes well and similarly improves masks generated by Swin.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 4.2 Bridge the Gaps · p. 7

    rNCA effectively bridges gaps in fragmented vein segmentations, with the biggest improvement occurring in the initial steps and maintaining a steady state from there.

    “rNCA effectively bridges gaps in fragmented vein segmentations, and that the biggest improvement occurs in the initial steps and maintains a steady state from there.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data
    § 4.2 Bridge the Gaps · p. 7

    On average rNCA provides modest improvements while maintaining stability across all initial clDice scores.

    “on average rNCA provides modest improvements while maintaining stability across all initial scores.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning
    § C Experiments: Retinal Vessels (DRIVE) · p. 20

    In the ablation, decreasing rollout depth to T=16 or replacing the whole batch N=B causes the model not to achieve a steady state.

    “We can see by decreasing the rollout depth too much (e.g. T = 16 ) or replace the whole batch N = B , the model does not achieve a steady state.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 4.1 Fill the Gaps · p. 6

    Both morphological operations and rNCA improve the Dice score from 0.80 to 0.96 and 0.98, respectively.

    “Both morphological operations and rNCA improve the Dice score from 0 . 80 to 0 . 96 and 0 . 98 , respectively.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingreasoning
    § C Experiments: Retinal Vessels (DRIVE) · p. 19

    The patch extraction created approximately 4000 patches for all 20 images.

    “This creates ˜ 4000 patches for all 20 images.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data
    § B Experiments: Liver (CHAOS-CT) · p. 18

    On the liver filling task, rNCA achieved a mean HD of 3.66 ± 3.20, compared to 10.51 ± 3.68 for the initial mask and 7.57 ± 4.28 for morphological reconstruction.

    “| Initial mask | 10 . 51 ± 3 . 68 | 0 . 673 ± 0 . 887 | 0 . 798 ± 0 . 145 |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 4.2 Bridge the Gaps · p. 7

    rNCA increases both Dice and clDice, and notably reduces Betti-number deviations from the base-method predictions.

    “rNCA increases both Dice and clDice, and notably reduces Betti-number deviations from the base-method predictions.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data
    § B Experiments: Liver (CHAOS-CT) · p. 18

    On the liver filling task, rNCA achieved a mean ASSD of 0.094 ± 0.779, compared to 0.673 ± 0.887 for the initial mask and 0.190 ± 0.790 for morphological reconstruction.

    “| Morph. reconstr. | 7 . 57 ± 4 . 28 | 0 . 190 ± 0 . 790 | 0 . 958 ± 0 . 090 |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data
    § B Experiments: Liver (CHAOS-CT) · p. 18

    On the liver filling task, rNCA achieved a mean DICE of 0.983 ± 0.089, compared to 0.798 ± 0.145 for the initial mask and 0.958 ± 0.090 for morphological reconstruction.

    “| rNCA | 3 . 66 3 . 20 | 0 . 094 0 . 779 | 0 . 983 0 . 089 |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 4.3 Close the Gap · p. 8

    Refining both models' predictions with rNCA improves segmentation performance across all metrics, with particularly strong gains on cases that initially had non-closed loops.

    “Refining both models' predictions with rNCA improves segmentation performance across all metrics, with particularly strong gains on cases that initially had non-closed loops (Table 4.3).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Including unperturbed ground truths in the dataset avoids overcorrection from rNCA.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Findingnone given
    § 5 Discussion · p. 10

    When the image is too ambiguous, local context may be insufficient to learn the correct dynamics.

    “When the image is too ambiguous, local context may be insufficient to learn the correct dynamics.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 4.2 Bridge the Gaps · p. 7

    rNCA has large improvements in topology performance, showing its ability to indirectly learn the topological features from the training dataset.

    “rNCA has large improvements in topology performance, showing its ability to indirectly learn the topological features from the training dataset.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § 5 Discussion · p. 9

    Across three structurally distinct repair tasks, rNCA has consistently improved topological correctness while minimally affecting already good predictions.

    “Across three structurally distinct repair tasks, rNCA has consistently improved topological correctness while minimally affecting already good predictions.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Synthetic perturbations (removing regions, thinning, opening, thickening) emulate systematic segmentation artifacts.
    • Rests on an assumption: Including unperturbed ground truths in the dataset avoids overcorrection from rNCA.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data
    § C Experiments: Retinal Vessels (DRIVE) · p. 19

    During inference, clDice and Dice show the same convergence behaviour.

    “Figure 6 (left) shows the same convergence behaviour for clDice and Dice during inference.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § D Experiments: Myocardium · p. 22

    TEDS-Net achieves 100% correct topology, but its segmentations are often misaligned.

    “Further, it shows that despite TEDS-Net achieving 100% correct topology, often the segmentations are misaligned.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data
    § C Experiments: Retinal Vessels (DRIVE) · p. 21

    On CPU, rNCA time per image is 75.20 ms (1.17 ms/iter), compared to 3.90 ms for DenseCRF, 4.91 ms for SegFix, 0.46 ms for SegRefiner, and 4.27 ms for UNet.

    “| DenseCRF | 0 . 0195 ± 0 . 0001 | 3.90 | N/A |”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data
    § C Experiments: Retinal Vessels (DRIVE) · p. 21

    On GPU, rNCA time per image is 2.48 ms (0.039 ms/iter), compared to 2.66 ms for SegFix, 0.23 ms for SegRefiner, and 2.05 ms for UNet.

    “| SegFix | 0 . 0133 ± 0 . 0164 | 2.66 | 1,931,392 |”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data
    § C Experiments: Retinal Vessels (DRIVE) · p. 21

    rNCA's parameter count is comparable to SegRefiner and orders of magnitude lighter than UNet- or SegFix-based refinement.

    “Despite this, its end-to-end runtime is on par with or faster than most learned refiners, while its parameter count remains extremely small ( 12 , 048 ), comparable to SegRefiner and orders of magnitude lighter than UNet- or SegFix-based refinement.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data
    § C Experiments: Retinal Vessels (DRIVE) · p. 20

    rNCA already reaches a steady state solution with less memory cost.

    “Increasing roll-out time ( T = 128 ) furthermore did not seem to improve the performance much as rNCA already reaches a steady state solution with less memory cost.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given
    § 5 Discussion · p. 10

    rNCA offers a drop-in mechanism that does not need to interact with the base model training process.

    “A practical advantage of rNCA is that it offers a drop-in mechanism that does not need to interact with the base model training process.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 3.1 Design philosophy · p. 4

    This keeps the refiner architecture-agnostic, dataset-agnostic and simple to integrate into existing pipelines.

    “This keeps the refiner architecture-agnostic, dataset-agnostic and simple to integrate into existing pipelines.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 5 Discussion · p. 10

    NCA training is more complex due to its iterative nature and can result in slower training times than single pass methods.

    “despite the small network size, the NCAs training is more complex due to its iterative nature. It has to not only learn from the initial masks, but also learn how to correct and balance its own predictions into a steady state solution, which can result in slower training times than single pass methods.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given
    § 3.1 Design philosophy · p. 4

    The model does not encode any task-specific topology; it learns generic repair dynamics based on the perturbative states seen during training.

    “The model does not encode any task-specific topology. Instead, it learns generic repair dynamics based on the perturbative states seen during trainings.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data
    § 4.1 Fill the Gaps · p. 6

    rNCA learns the anatomical shape, preserving these features.

    “whereas rNCA learns the anatomical shape, preserving these features.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductnone given
    § C Experiments: Retinal Vessels (DRIVE) · p. 19

    For each fold, the model with the highest Dice score on full-sized validation images was selected to create the initial predictions.

    “The model with the highest Dice score on the full sized validation images is selected for each fold and used to create the initial predictions that we will refine.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 1 Introduction · p. 2

    rNCA yields more connected and more structurally and anatomically plausible masks.

    “yielding more connected and more structurally and anatomically plausible masks (Figure 1).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 6 Conclusion & Future Research · p. 11

    They are simple, easy to deploy, and capable of repairing errors that compromise downstream reliability without task-specific customization of the refiner.

    “They are simple, easy to deploy, and capable of repairing errors that compromise downstream reliability without task-specific customization of the refiner”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data
    § B Experiments: Liver (CHAOS-CT) · p. 18

    The liver dataset was split by patient into 14 training, 3 validation, and 3 test subjects.

    “The dataset is split by patient into 14 training, 3 validation, and 3 test subjects.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 5 Discussion · p. 10

    The method is easy to port to different datasets without having to fine tune its hyperparameters.

    “due to its simplicity, the method is easy to port to different datasets without having to fine tune its hyperparameters.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductnone given
    § C Experiments: Retinal Vessels (DRIVE) · p. 19

    Each baseline refiner was trained on the same dataset as rNCA until convergence using publicly available implementations.

    “Each refiner was trained on the same dataset as rNCA , until convergence, using their publicly available implementations for Segfix 1 , SegRefiner 2 and DenserCRF 3 .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 3.4 Inference · p. 5

    Since the update rule is fully local, performance is independent of mask size and can be used in input images of arbitrary resolution.

    “Since the update rule is fully local, performance is independent of mask size and thus can be used in input images of arbitrary resolution.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given
    § C Experiments: Retinal Vessels (DRIVE) · p. 20

    All ablation variants were trained with the same protocol and evaluated on DICE, clDICE, and Betti number deviations.

    “All variants are trained with the same protocol and evaluated on DICE, clDICE, and Betti number deviations.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data
    § Abstract · p. 1

    NCA are effective and broadly applicable refiners.

    “This showcases NCA as effective and broadly applicable refiners.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given
    § 5 Discussion · p. 10

    Its steady-state solution preserves accurate segmentation while correcting those that are suboptimal.

    “Its steady-state solution preserves accurate segmentation while correcting those that are suboptimal.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data
    § C Experiments: Retinal Vessels (DRIVE) · p. 20

    These configurations limit or prevent the progression of samples and lead to instability during inference.

    “Both configuration limit (or prevent completely) the progression of samples and hence lead to instability during inference.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given
    § 2 Related Work · p. 3

    This is the first work to propose NCA as a refinement tool.

    “To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work to propose NCA as a refinement tool”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 3.2 Local perception and update rule · p. 4

    The update rule enforces strictly local reasoning for state dynamics while allowing information to propagate globally through iterative updates.

    “This formulation enforces strictly local reasoning for state dynamics while allowing information to propagate globally through iterative updates.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § C Experiments: Retinal Vessels (DRIVE) · p. 20

    The ablation setup isolates the effect of architectural capacity, state refresh frequency, rollout depth, and supervision source on the ability of rNCA to correct fragmented vessels.

    “As summarized in Table C, this setup isolates the effect of architectural capacity, state refresh frequency, rollout depth, and supervision source on the ability of rNCA to correct fragmented vessels.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given
    § C Experiments: Retinal Vessels (DRIVE) · p. 20

    The ablation was done on a random fold different from the training folds.

    “Ablation is done on a random fold, different to the training folds.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation
    § C Experiments: Retinal Vessels (DRIVE) · p. 19

    The DRIVE dataset consists of 20 images and is a standardized benchmark for evaluating retinal blood vessel segmentation methods in diabetic retinopathy screening.

    “The DRIVE [45] dataset consists of 20 images, developed to provide a standardized benchmark for evaluating retinal blood vessel segmentation methods in the context of diabetic retinopathy screening.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [45] [45] Joes Staal, Michael D Abràmoff, Meindert Niemeijer, Max A Viergever, and Bram Van Ginneken. Ridge-based vessel segmentation in color images of the retina. IEEE transactions on medical imaging , 23(4):501-509, 2004. - source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning
    § 5 Discussion · p. 10

    Its smaller parameter count and architecture makes it portable and ideal to be deployed in edge devices.

    “Its smaller parameter count (see Appendix B) and architecture makes it portable and ideal to be deployed in edge devices.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductcitation
    § C Experiments: Retinal Vessels (DRIVE) · p. 19

    The DRIVE data was randomly split 0.8:0.2 across three folds, and average validation metrics were reported.

    “Due to its small dataset size we randomly split the data 0.8:0.2 across three folds and report the average validation metrics, as done in prior work see [48].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [48] [48] Xiaoling Hu, Fuxin Li, Dimitris Samaras, and Chao Chen. Topologypreserving deep image segmentation. Advances in neural information processing systems , 32, 2019. -

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • Rests on an assumption: The DRIVE dataset is small.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data
    § 4.1 Fill the Gaps · p. 6

    The cohort includes 20 CT patients, split into training/validation/test sets at the patient level.

    “The cohort includes 20 CT patients, which we split into training/validation/test sets at the patient level”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given
    § 3.2 Local perception and update rule · p. 4

    Masking of alive pixels leads to growth-pruning dynamics that fix errors while preserving current structures.

    “Next, masking of alive pixels is applied so that only pixels within or near the active regions of s t and s t +1 are allowed to modify the state, leading to growth-pruning dynamics that fix errors while preserving current structures.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data
    § D Experiments: Myocardium · p. 21

    The ACDC dataset was split by patient into 85 training, 15 validation, and 10 test subjects.

    “The dataset was split by patient into 85 (850 slices) training, 15 (150 slices) validation, and 10 (100 slices) for testing.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation
    § D Experiments: Myocardium · p. 22

    TopoLoss is a topological loss function that aligns the persistent homology of predicted probability maps with that of the ground-truth labels.

    “The first is TopoLoss [48], a topological loss function that aligns the persistent homology of predicted probability maps with that of the ground-truth labels.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [48] [48] Xiaoling Hu, Fuxin Li, Dimitris Samaras, and Chao Chen. Topologypreserving deep image segmentation. Advances in neural information processing systems , 32, 2019. -

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisenone given
    § D Experiments: Myocardium · p. 22

    For topology-based comparisons, published predictions from two additional methods were used.

    “For topologybased comparisons, we likewise used the published predictions from two additional methods.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
56 of 56

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Synthetic perturbations (removing regions, thinning, opening, thickening) emulate systematic segmentation artifacts.

    “This aims to emulate systematic segmentation artifacts.”
    “we construct a synthetic variant of the CHAOS liver dataset [44] by removing regions of varying size and shape from ground-truth masks.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Including unperturbed ground truths in the dataset avoids overcorrection from rNCA.

    “in order to avoid overcorrection from rNCA , we include unperturbed ground truths into the dataset”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Thin structures often break in practice in retinal vessel segmentation, and UNet predictions reflect these characteristic failure modes.

    “Thin structures often break in practice, and UNet predictions reflect these characteristic failure modes.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    In the ACDC dataset, different thickness may be expected at different arc segments, and the refiner is required to handle both thinning and thickening operations.

    “This is critical for ACDC dataset where different thickness may be expected at different arc segments and we require the refiner to be able to handle both types of operations.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The morphological perturbations (thinning, small deletions, opening/closing) emulate typical segmentation failures.

    “These corruptions are created using simple morphological perturbations, such as thinning, small deletions, or mild opening and closing operations, which emulate typical segmentation failures.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The initial predictions can be good and we do not want to over refine good initial states.

    “Lastly, as the initial predictions can be good and we do not want to over refine good initial states, we included unperturbed ground truth masks.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    A key requirement for a segmentation model is that it is able to perform well on edge devices.

    “A key requirement for a segmentation model is that it is able to perfrom well on edge devices.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The DRIVE dataset is small.

    “Due to its small dataset size we randomly split the data 0.8:0.2 across three folds and report the average validation metrics, as done in prior work see [48].”
8 of 8

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Myocardium patient split exceeds the stated cohort

    Major

    The training, validation, and test patient counts sum to 110, although the dataset is described as containing 100 patients.

    Reported 100 · recomputed 110

  • Liver distance values differ between the text and Table 4

    Major

    The text reports refined ASSD of 0.08 and HD of 4.3, whereas Table 4 reports 0.094 and 3.66, respectively. These differences exceed rounding to the precision used in the text.

  • Myocardium slice counts conflict with the extraction description

    Major

    Two scans per patient and two extracted slices per scan imply four slices per patient. The stated split instead assigns ten slices per patient in each group, such as 850 slices from 85 training patients.

  • CPU runtime is not on par with other learned refiners

    Minor

    Table 5 reports 75.20 ms per image for rNCA on CPU, versus 0.46-4.91 ms for the other learned refiners. Thus its CPU runtime is neither on par with nor faster than most of them.

  • Perception-network output dimensions disagree

    Minor

    The stated mapping gives the state perception operator K output channels. The later assertion that its output dimension matches N = 64 when K = 16 gives it 64 output channels instead.

  • Myocardium refinement does not improve every metric

    Minor

    The claim of improvement across all metrics conflicts with Table 2: UNet ASSD increases from 0.81 to 0.83 after rNCA, where lower is better.

6 of 6

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [37][37] Yuhui Yuan, Jingyi Xie, Xilin Chen, and Jingdong Wang. Segfix: Modelagnostic boundary refinement for segmentation. In European conference on computer vision , pages 489-506, 2020. -
  2. [48][48] Xiaoling Hu, Fuxin Li, Dimitris Samaras, and Chao Chen. Topologypreserving deep image segmentation. Advances in neural information processing systems , 32, 2019. -

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Silbernagel, M., Alonso, A., Petersen, J., Ibragimov, B., de Bruijne, M., & Wyburd, M. K.
Affiliations
University of Copenhagen (DK)
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2025
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2512.13397
arXiv
2512.13397
OpenAlex
W4417458463
Semantic Scholar
b14758fcc721e27da9114f9dd7b5574b5cb0a1be
Cited by
0
References
46
FWCI
0.00
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • VBN Forskningsportal (Aalborg Universitet) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Medical Image Segmentation Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Retinal Imaging and Analysis
Keywords
neural cellular automata, topological consistency, Betti numbers, retinal vessel segmentation, myocardium segmentation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-22.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-22.

Cited sources are checked by gpt-6-sol.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review