Evaluates the cross-modality generalization and robustness of 3D medical segmentation foundation models by testing their ability to segment 13 whole-body organs in functional (PET) versus structural (CT/MRI) imaging using intrinsically paired intra-subject scans. Use when the user wants to benchmark on UMD Benchmark, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC).
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill umd-3d-medical-seg-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Umd 3d Medical Seg Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-umd-3d-medical-seg-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: umd-3d-medical-seg-eval
description: Evaluates the cross-modality generalization and robustness of 3D medical segmentation foundation models by testing their ability to segment 13 whole-body organs in functional (PET) versus structural (CT/MRI) imaging using intrinsically paired intra-subject scans. Use when the user wants to benchmark on UMD Benchmark, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC).
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2602.07643
bibtex_key: zhang2026umd
confidence: medium
---
# umd-3d-medical-seg-eval
> Uncovering Modality Discrepancy and Generalization Illusion for General-Purpose 3D Medical Segmentation — Zhang et al. (2026) (arXiv:2602.07643, 2026)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates the cross-modality generalization and robustness of 3D medical segmentation foundation models by testing their ability to segment 13 whole-body organs in functional (PET) versus structural (CT/MRI) imaging using intrinsically paired intra-subject scans.
## Datasets
- **UMD Benchmark** — total 954; splits: test (954); repo https://github.com/YichiZhang98/UMD
## Metrics
- `Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC)` **(primary)** — range: [0, 1]
- Standard voxel-wise overlap metric for medical segmentation: DSC = 2 * |A ∩ B| / (|A| + |B|), where A and B are prediction and ground truth masks. Reported per organ and averaged across the 13 target organs.
## Input / output format
**Input**: 3D volumetric medical images (whole-body PET, CT, or MRI scans) acquired from the same subject during a single diagnostic session.
**Output**: Voxel-wise segmentation masks identifying 13 target organs: liver, left kidney, right kidney, brain, heart, spleen, aorta, lung, colon, urinary bladder, pancreas, esophagus, and stomach.
## Scoring recipe
```python
def compute_dice(pred_mask, gt_mask):
intersection = np.sum(pred_mask & gt_mask)
union = np.sum(pred_mask) + np.sum(gt_mask)
return 2.0 * intersection / union if union > 0 else 0.0
dsc_scores = [compute_dice(pred, gt) for pred, gt in zip(predictions, ground_truth)]
mean_dsc = np.mean(dsc_scores)
```
## Common pitfalls
- Assuming performance on structural modalities (CT/MRI) generalizes to functional modalities (PET), which the benchmark explicitly shows fails due to low-contrast metabolic signals.
- Using recompiled public datasets that risk data leakage, whereas this benchmark uses newly collected intra-subject paired scans to guarantee evaluation validity.
- Entangling task complexity with modality differences, obscuring true cross-modality robustness.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> Voxel-wise annotations were provided for 13 diverse organs, including the liver, left kidney, right kidney, brain, heart, spleen, aorta, lung, colon, urinary bladder, pancreas, esophagus, and stomach. By providing ground-truth labels for both structural and functional imaging, our protocol enables a head-to-head comparison between different modalities.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{zhang2026umd,
title={Uncovering Modality Discrepancy and Generalization Illusion for General-Purpose 3D Medical Segmentation},
author={Zhang et al. (2026)},
year={2026},
note={arXiv:2602.07643}
}
```
- arXiv: 2602.07643
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!