Papers › Rethinking Abdominal Organ Segmentation (RAOS) in the clinical scenario: A robustness...
Rethinking Abdominal Organ Segmentation (RAOS) in the clinical scenario: A robustness evaluation benchmark with challenging cases
Xiangde Luo, Zihan Li, Shaoting Zhang, Wenjun Liao, Guotai Wang
Deep learning has enabled great strides in abdominal multi-organ segmentation, even surpassing junior oncologists on common cases or organs. However, robustness on corner cases and complex organs remains a challenging open problem for clinical adoption. To investigate model robustness, we collected and annotated the RAOS dataset comprising 413 CT scans (∼80k 2D images, ∼8k 3D organ annotations) from 413 patients each with 17 (female) or 19 (male) labelled organs, manually delineated by oncologists. We grouped scans based on clinical information into 1) diagnosis/radiotherapy (317 volumes), 2) partial excision without the whole organ missing (22 volumes), and 3) excision with the whole organ missing (74 volumes). RAOS provides a potential benchmark for evaluating model robustness including organ hallucination. It also includes some organs that can be very hard to access on public datasets like the rectum, colon, intestine, prostate and seminal vesicles. We benchmarked several state-of-the-art methods in these three clinical groups to evaluate performance and robustness. We also assessed cross-generalization between RAOS and three public datasets. This dataset and comprehensive analysis establish a potential baseline for future robustness research: \url{https://github.com/Luoxd1996/RAOS}.
Code
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
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Tasks
1 archive task tag without a task page not shown.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
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