Back

MCA-UNet: A Multi-Scale Context and Attention U-Net for Colorectal Polyp Segmentation

Dong, Y.; Fang, G.; Du, R.; Hu, H.; Fang, Z.; Guo, C.; Lu, R.; Jia, Y.; Tian, Y.; Wang, Z.

2026-03-16 gastroenterology
10.64898/2026.03.11.26348049 medRxiv
Show abstract

IntroductionTo propose an improved U-Net-based segmentation model for colorectal polyp segmentation, aiming to address the challenges of variable lesion morphology, ambiguous boundaries, complex background interference, and insufficient cross-level feature fusion in endoscopic images [5,12]. MethodsAn improved network termed MCA-UNet was developed based on U-Net [5]. The model incorporates a multi-scale context convolution block (MCCB) to enhance multi-scale feature extraction and an attention-guided feature fusion module (AGFF) to optimize skip-feature selection and fusion in the decoder. Experiments were conducted on publicly available colorectal polyp image datasets, including Kvasir-SEG and CVC-ClinicDB [13-15]. Four models, including U-Net, U-Net+MCCB, U-Net+AGFF, and MCA-UNet, were compared, and all models were trained for 100 epochs. Dice, intersection over union (IoU), and mean absolute error (MAE) were used as the main evaluation metrics [20]. ResultsOn the mixed validation set, the Dice scores of U-Net, U-Net+MCCB, U-Net+AGFF, and MCA-UNet were 0.742, 0.771, 0.754, and 0.783, respectively; the corresponding IoU values were 0.603, 0.635, 0.618, and 0.649; and the MAE values were 0.102, 0.090, 0.097, and 0.086. Compared with the baseline U-Net, MCA-UNet improved Dice and IoU by 5.53% and 7.63%, respectively, while reducing MAE by 15.69%. Comparisons on the Kvasir-SEG and CVC-ClinicDB validation subsets further demonstrated the more stable performance of the proposed model. ConclusionBy jointly integrating multi-scale contextual modeling and attention-guided feature fusion, MCA-UNet effectively improves the accuracy and robustness of colorectal polyp segmentation and may provide useful support for intelligent endoscopic image analysis [12,17,18].

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.