Papers › Leveraging Hallucinations to Reduce Manual Prompt Dependency in Promptable Segmentation

Leveraging Hallucinations to Reduce Manual Prompt Dependency in Promptable Segmentation

27 Aug 2024arXiv:2408.15205archive 2025-07-28

Jian Hu, Jiayi Lin, Junchi Yan, Shaogang Gong

Promptable segmentation typically requires instance-specific manual prompts to guide the segmentation of each desired object. To minimize such a need, task-generic promptable segmentation has been introduced, which employs a single task-generic prompt to segment various images of different objects in the same task. Current methods use Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) to reason detailed instance-specific prompts from a task-generic prompt for improving segmentation accuracy. The effectiveness of this segmentation heavily depends on the precision of these derived prompts. However, MLLMs often suffer hallucinations during reasoning, resulting in inaccurate prompting. While existing methods focus on eliminating hallucinations to improve a model, we argue that MLLM hallucinations can reveal valuable contextual insights when leveraged correctly, as they represent pre-trained large-scale knowledge beyond individual images. In this paper, we utilize hallucinations to mine task-related information from images and verify its accuracy for enhancing precision of the generated prompts. Specifically, we introduce an iterative Prompt-Mask Cycle generation framework (ProMaC) with a prompt generator and a mask generator.The prompt generator uses a multi-scale chain of thought prompting, initially exploring hallucinations for extracting extended contextual knowledge on a test image.These hallucinations are then reduced to formulate precise instance-specific prompts, directing the mask generator to produce masks that are consistent with task semantics by mask semantic alignment. The generated masks iteratively induce the prompt generator to focus more on task-relevant image areas and reduce irrelevant hallucinations, resulting jointly in better prompts and masks. Experiments on 5 benchmarks demonstrate the effectiveness of ProMaC. Code given in https://lwpyh.github.io/ProMaC/.

PaperPDFCodeCode Syntology ran

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="2408.15205")

Code

Syntology Ran 2 of 9 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 7 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 1 ran · violated contract; 1 ran · fixture could not drive it.

By repository: official repository: 9 samples from 1 repository, 2 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.

lwpyh/ProMaC_code officialmentioned on GitHubpytorch report

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

9 samples harvested; 2 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 7 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.

1ran · violated contract
1ran · fixture could not drive it
7unverified

Licence: 0 of the 9 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 lwpyh/ProMaC_code. “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.

convert_patch_bbox_to_original lwpyh/ProMaC_code/utils_mllm.py official repository ran · violated contract fingerprinted MIT (permissive) · 923b02f12c4e8943 · report
expand_bbox lwpyh/ProMaC_code/utils_mllm.py official repository ran · fixture could not drive it fingerprinted MIT (permissive) · 93aa0fead442ddef · report
generate_image lwpyh/ProMaC_code/utils_mllm.py official repository unverified MIT (permissive) · 4379261942974adb · report
get_reflected_text_from_full_img_llava lwpyh/ProMaC_code/utils_mllm.py official repository unverified MIT (permissive) · fc5b045f2c663b01 · report
get_reflected_text_from_img lwpyh/ProMaC_code/utils_mllm.py official repository unverified MIT (permissive) · 47abbc2ac21defe8 · report
get_reflected_text_from_img_llava_collected lwpyh/ProMaC_code/utils_mllm.py official repository unverified MIT (permissive) · 4f885a4ecc54c188 · report
get_text_from_img_llava_with_bbox_iter0 lwpyh/ProMaC_code/utils_mllm.py official repository unverified MIT (permissive) · 141d2009ede3317e · report
get_text_from_img_llava_with_bbox_patch lwpyh/ProMaC_code/utils_mllm.py official repository unverified MIT (permissive) · b470f2ff84a1db05 · report
show lwpyh/ProMaC_code/utils_mllm.py official repository unverified MIT (permissive) · 03c001cd5ce7f974 · report

Tasks

Camouflaged Object SegmentationCamouflaged Object Segmentation with a Single Task-generic PromptMedical Image SegmentationSegmentation

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

TaskDatasetModelMetricValueRank at snapshotLeaderboardReport
Camouflaged Object Segmentation with a Single Task-generic Prompt CAMO ProMaC E_{\phi} 0.846 #2 of 3 Archive leaderboard report
Camouflaged Object Segmentation with a Single Task-generic Prompt CAMO ProMaC F_{\beta} 0.725 #2 of 3 Archive leaderboard report
Camouflaged Object Segmentation with a Single Task-generic Prompt CAMO ProMaC MAE 0.09 #2 of 3 Archive leaderboard report
Camouflaged Object Segmentation with a Single Task-generic Prompt CAMO ProMaC S_{\alpha} 0.767 #2 of 3 Archive leaderboard report
Camouflaged Object Segmentation with a Single Task-generic Prompt COD10K ProMaC E_{\phi} 0.876 #2 of 3 Archive leaderboard report
Camouflaged Object Segmentation with a Single Task-generic Prompt COD10K ProMaC F_{\beta} 0.716 #2 of 3 Archive leaderboard report
Camouflaged Object Segmentation with a Single Task-generic Prompt COD10K ProMaC MAE 0.042 #2 of 3 Archive leaderboard report
Camouflaged Object Segmentation with a Single Task-generic Prompt COD10K ProMaC S_{\alpha} 0.805 #2 of 3 Archive leaderboard report
Camouflaged Object Segmentation with a Single Task-generic Prompt Chameleon ProMaC E_{\phi} 0.899 #1 of 2 Archive leaderboard report
Camouflaged Object Segmentation with a Single Task-generic Prompt Chameleon ProMaC F_{\beta} 0.79 #1 of 2 Archive leaderboard report
Camouflaged Object Segmentation with a Single Task-generic Prompt Chameleon ProMaC MAE 0.044 #1 of 2 Archive leaderboard report
Camouflaged Object Segmentation with a Single Task-generic Prompt Chameleon ProMaC S_{\alpha} 0.833 #1 of 2 Archive leaderboard report

Ranks are positions in the archive's leaderboards as they stood at the 2025-07-28 snapshot. Results published since then are not among these rows, so a rank here is not a current standing.

Methods

GenSAMSAM

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