©The Author(s) 2025.
World J Gastroenterol. Nov 7, 2025; 31(41): 111184
Published online Nov 7, 2025. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v31.i41.111184
Published online Nov 7, 2025. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v31.i41.111184
Figure 6 Examples of segmentation output visualizations of the top-two- and worst-performing models of each model category on the self-collected dataset.
Light blue: Fully overlapping regions; Medium blue: Two-map overlaps; Dark blue: Single-map regions; Yellow: Ground truth lesions; SETR: Segmentation transformer; MLA: Multi-level feature aggregation; PVTV2: Pyramid vision transformer v2; EMCAD: Efficient multi-scale convolutional decoding; N: Normal; EN: Esophageal neoplasm; EV: Esophageal varices; GERD: Gastroesophageal reflux disease; GN: Gastric neoplasm; GP: Gastric polyp; GU: Gastric ulcer; GV: Gastric varices; DU: Duodenal ulcer.
- Citation: Chan IN, Wong PK, Yan T, Hu YY, Chan CI, Qin YY, Wong CH, Chan IW, Lam IH, Wong SH, Li Z, Gao S, Yu HH, Yao L, Zhao BL, Hu Y. Assessing deep learning models for multi-class upper endoscopic disease segmentation: A comprehensive comparative study. World J Gastroenterol 2025; 31(41): 111184
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v31/i41/111184.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v31.i41.111184