Papers › Do Vision Foundation Models Enhance Domain Generalization in Medical Image Segmentation?
Do Vision Foundation Models Enhance Domain Generalization in Medical Image Segmentation?
Kerem Cekmeceli, Meva Himmetoglu, Guney I. Tombak, Anna Susmelj, Ertunc Erdil, Ender Konukoglu
Neural networks achieve state-of-the-art performance in many supervised learning tasks when the training data distribution matches the test data distribution. However, their performance drops significantly under domain (covariate) shift, a prevalent issue in medical image segmentation due to varying acquisition settings across different scanner models and protocols. Recently, foundational models (FMs) trained on large datasets have gained attention for their ability to be adapted for downstream tasks and achieve state-of-the-art performance with excellent generalization capabilities on natural images. However, their effectiveness in medical image segmentation remains underexplored. In this paper, we investigate the domain generalization performance of various FMs, including DinoV2, SAM, MedSAM, and MAE, when fine-tuned using various parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT) techniques such as Ladder and Rein (+LoRA) and decoder heads. We introduce a novel decode head architecture, HQHSAM, which simply integrates elements from two state-of-the-art decoder heads, HSAM and HQSAM, to enhance segmentation performance. Our extensive experiments on multiple datasets, encompassing various anatomies and modalities, reveal that FMs, particularly with the HQHSAM decode head, improve domain generalization for medical image segmentation. Moreover, we found that the effectiveness of PEFT techniques varies across different FMs. These findings underscore the potential of FMs to enhance the domain generalization performance of neural networks in medical image segmentation across diverse clinical settings, providing a solid foundation for future research. Code and models are available for research purposes at \url{https://github.com/kerem-cekmeceli/Foundation-Models-for-Medical-Imagery}.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2409.07960")
Code
Syntology Ran 3 of 3 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 0 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 1 ran · our draft was wrong; 1 ran · fixture could not drive it; 1 ran with no contract checked.
By repository: official repository: 3 samples from 1 repository, 3 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
3 samples harvested; 3 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 0 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.
Licence: 3 of the 3 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.
Harvested from kerem-cekmeceli/foundation-models-for-medical-imagery. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.
Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.
Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.
144d10b49baeb8a6 · report
ea891af4a16017d0 · report
61bf152e6a42a184 · report
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Methods
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections