arXiv preprint ·
Detection is solved, delineation is not: what governs tooth segmentation on panoramic radiographs
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
Automatic tooth segmentation and FDI numbering on panoramic radiographs underpins computer-assisted dental diagnosis, yet which factors govern performance remains unclear. We assemble a corpus of 1,422 panoramic radiographs containing 42,142 expert-delineated tooth polygons across the 32-class FDI taxonomy, annotated by 30 dental practitioners and independently reviewed by two others, and use it to isolate input resolution, architecture and anatomical priors under a single evaluation protocol. First, resolution dominates: across a controlled 640/1024/1280 ablation, mask mAP50-95 rises 0.656 -> 0.710 -> 0.717 while mAP50 stays flat at ~0.982. Both gains are significant under a paired bootstrap over images (p < 0.001, p = 0.024); neither mAP50 change is distinguishable from zero. Added resolution buys boundary precision, not detection. Second, architecture is nearly irrelevant in-domain: a query-based transformer with 2.1x the parameters is statistically equivalent to a one-stage detector (95% CI [-0.0064, +0.0064]), only marginally better under domain shift, 5.5x slower on CPU and not executable under standard ONNX runtimes. Third, three targeted interventions fail: a LoRA-adapted self-supervised encoder underperforms, a promptable foundation segmenter degrades masks by 39%, and globally optimal anatomical label assignment yields +0.0007 despite correcting a constraint violated in 40% of out-of-domain predictions. Zero-shot transfer to an independent multi-centre cohort, verified overlap-free, costs 62% of mask mAP50-95 but only 18% of mAP50, reproducing the dissociation. Decomposing masks along the tooth axis localises the residual error to the apical third. Boundary precision is therefore the binding constraint, and effort is better directed at resolution and acquisition diversity than at architectural novelty.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Computer Vision
Adaptive Color Grading
PanoSeg3R: Feed-Forward 3D Semantic Segmentation for Panoramic Images with an Automatic Data Curation Pipeline
4DGS-Fixer: Generative Sparse-View 4D Gaussian Splatting with Iterative Refinement Guided by Video Diffusion Priors
Vision2CAD: A Visual Agent Harness for Explicit Geometry Referencing and Localization in Parametric CAD Modeling
Robust Structureless Monocular Visual Inertial Initialization Exploiting Line Features and Vanishing Points
Get the few papers worth your time in Computer Vision every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.