FreqFuseNet: Resolving Feature-Scale Mismatch in Dual-Frequency Fusion for Thin-Wall Head-and-Neck OAR Segmentation
Chen, W.-Y.; Wan, S.-Y.; Lin, G.-Y.
Show abstract
Accurate segmentation of thin-wall organs-at-risk (OARs)-the cochlea, vestibular semicircular canals, internal auditory canal, tympanic cavity, and middle ear-is clinically relevant for head-and-neck radiotherapy planning, yet these small, thin-wall structures remain among the most challenging targets for automated delineation. Dual-frequency feature fusion is a promising direction for boundary-sensitive representation, but under the investigated FP16 FFT-FcaNet setting, we observe an approximately 863-fold activation-scale mismatch between the FFT and FcaNet branches, causing a nominal 5 percent residual coefficient to behave as an approximately 43-fold dominant term. We propose FreqFuseNet, which resolves this mismatch by normalizing the FcaNet branch to the FFT activation scale before residual injection with a fixed low-amplitude coefficient (beta = 0.05), restoring beta as an interpretable 5 percent residual-amplitude coefficient relative to the FFT feature scale. Under a controlled binary per-OAR ROI protocol on the SegRap2023 head-and-neck CT benchmark across 10 clinically prioritized thin-wall OARs, FreqFuseNet achieves Dice of 0.849, HD95 of 0.824 mm, and SDice@1mm of 0.959 in the primary seed, with comparable performance in an independent second seed (Dice 0.843, HD95 0.823 mm). FreqFuseNet yields statistically significant case-level aggregate improvements over 3D U-Net and MedNeXt-S (Wilcoxon p < 0.01 and p < 0.05, respectively), using only 29.7 million parameters versus 414.6 million for the full wavelet baseline.
Matching journals
The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
"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.