Volumetric tumor segmentation, and why the spread matters
A 3D U-Net trained with five fold cross validation on brain tumor MRI, where the spread of per case scores turned out to carry far more information than the average.
0.6181
Whole tumor Dice
5 fold average
0.4472
Tumor core Dice
0.4524
Enhancing tumor
8.85 mm
Whole tumor HD95
The question
Tumor subregions occupy a tiny fraction of a brain volume, and the three targets are nested: enhancing tumor inside tumor core inside whole tumor. A model can post a respectable average while the smallest and most clinically important region goes unrecovered.
Approach
A 3D U-Net implemented in MONAI, trained with five fold cross validation on GPU nodes through SLURM, with augmentation covering rotations, flips and additive noise, and a cyclic learning rate schedule. I logged per case scores rather than only per fold means, which is what made the next part visible.
Outcome
Average best whole tumor Dice of 0.6181 across folds. Per case, whole tumor averaged 0.6340 while enhancing tumor averaged 0.4524, and individual cases ranged from 0.08 to 0.84. The distribution is bimodal rather than tight, which is precisely what a single mean averages away.
What it taught me
This is where I started reporting distributions instead of averages, and it is the habit that carried straight into my thesis work. A 0.63 mean that is really a mixture of confident successes and near misses calls for a different fix from one that is uniformly middling.