Back

BEGA-UNet: Boundary-Explicit Guided Attention U-Net with Multi-Scale Feature Aggregation for Colonoscopic Polyp Segmentation

Tong, T.; Zhang, W.; Zu, W.

2026-03-05 gastroenterology
10.64898/2026.03.04.26347608 medRxiv
Show abstract

Accurate polyp segmentation from colonoscopy images is critical for colorectal cancer prevention, yet the generalization of deep learning models under domain shift remains insufficiently explored. We propose Boundary-Explicit Guided Attention U-Net (BEGA-UNet), a boundary-aware segmentation architecture that introduces explicit edge modeling as a structural inductive bias to enhance both segmentation accuracy and cross-domain robustness. The framework integrates three components: an Edge-Guided Module (EGM) with learnable Sobel-initialized operators to capture boundary cues, a Dual-Path Attention (DPA) module that processes channel and spatial attention in parallel, and a Multi-Scale Feature Aggregation (MSFA) module to encode contextual information across multiple receptive fields. Evaluated on the combined Kvasir-SEG and CVC-ClinicDB benchmarks, BEGA-UNet achieves 88.53% Dice and 82.51% IoU, outperforming representative convolutional and transformer-based baselines. More importantly, cross-dataset evaluation demonstrates strong robustness under domain shift, with BEGA-UNet retaining 83.2% of its in-distribution performance--substantially higher than U-Net (64.5%), Attention U-Net (47.5%), and TransUNet (53.1%). In a zero-shot setting on an entirely unseen dataset, the model further maintains 72.6% performance retention. Comprehensive ablation studies indicate that explicit boundary modeling plays a central role in improving generalization, while multi-scale context aggregation further stabilizes performance across domains. Feature distribution analyses support this observation by showing that edge-oriented representations exhibit markedly reduced cross-domain variability compared to appearance-driven features. Overall, BEGA-UNet provides an effective and interpretable solution for robust polyp segmentation, demonstrating that explicit boundary modeling serves as a critical inductive bias for ensuring reliability under clinical domain shifts.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Nature Biomedical Engineering
47 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
23.1%
2
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 15%
12.3%
3
Nature Medicine
125 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
7.0%
4
Medical Image Analysis
35 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.5%
5
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 14%
5.7%
50% of probability mass above
6
IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging
21 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.2%
7
Communications Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
3.3%
8
npj Digital Medicine
118 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.3%
9
Nature Machine Intelligence
70 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
2.9%
10
iScience
1154 papers in training set
Top 9%
2.7%
11
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 42%
2.5%
12
Cell Reports Medicine
153 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.0%
13
npj Precision Oncology
53 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.7%
14
IEEE Access
35 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.4%
15
eBioMedicine
183 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.0%
16
Clinical Cancer Research
64 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.0%
17
Frontiers in Medicine
120 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
18
IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics
37 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
19
Med
39 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.9%
20
PLOS Digital Health
106 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.6%
21
Diagnostics
50 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
22
Nature Methods
385 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.6%
23
Journal of Medical Imaging
11 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.6%
24
Journal of Medical Internet Research
87 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.5%
25
Neuro-Oncology Advances
25 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.5%
26
Modern Pathology
22 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.5%
27
Advanced Intelligent Systems
11 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.5%
28
IEEE Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics
20 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.5%
29
npj Genomic Medicine
36 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.5%