The pre-training and fine-tuning paradigm has become prominent in transfer learning. For example, if the model is pre-trained on ImageNet and then fine-tuned to PASCAL, it can significantly outperform that trained on PASCAL from scratch. While ImageNet pre-training has shown enormous success, it is formed in 2D, and the learned features are for classification tasks; when transferring to more diverse tasks, like 3D image segmentation, its performance is inevitably compromised due to the deviation from the original ImageNet context. A significant challenge lies in the lack of large, annotated 3D datasets rivaling the scale of ImageNet for model pre-training. To overcome this challenge, we make two contributions. Firstly, we construct AbdomenAtlas 1.1 that comprises 9,262 three-dimensional computed tomography (CT) volumes with high-quality, per-voxel annotations of 25 anatomical structures and pseudo annotations of seven tumor types. Secondly, we develop a suite of models that are pre-trained on our AbdomenAtlas 1.1 for transfer learning. Our preliminary analyses indicate that the model trained only with 21 CT volumes, 672 masks, and 40 GPU hours has a transfer learning ability similar to the model trained with 5,050 (unlabeled) CT volumes and 1,152 GPU hours. More importantly, the transfer learning ability of supervised models can further scale up with larger annotated datasets, achieving significantly better performance than preexisting pre-trained models, irrespective of their pre-training methodologies or data sources. We hope this study can facilitate collective efforts in constructing larger 3D medical datasets and more releases of supervised pre-trained models.

Uncertainty estimation is an essential and heavily-studied component for the reliable application of semantic segmentation methods. While various studies exist claiming methodological advances on the one hand, and successful application on the other hand, the field is currently hampered by a gap between theory and practice leaving fundamental questions unanswered: Can data-related and model-related uncertainty really be separated in practice? Which components of an uncertainty method are essential for real-world performance? Which uncertainty method works well for which application? In this work, we link this research gap to a lack of systematic and comprehensive evaluation of uncertainty methods. Specifically, we identify three key pitfalls in current literature and present an evaluation framework that bridges the research gap by providing 1) a controlled environment for studying data ambiguities as well as distribution shifts, 2) systematic ablations of relevant method components, and 3) test-beds for the five predominant uncertainty applications: OoD-detection, active learning, failure detection, calibration, and ambiguity modeling. Empirical results on simulated as well as real-world data demonstrate how the proposed framework is able to answer the predominant questions in the field revealing for instance that 1) separation of uncertainty types works on simulated data but does not necessarily translate to real-world data, 2) aggregation of scores is a crucial but currently neglected component of uncertainty methods, 3) While ensembles are performing most robustly across the different downstream tasks and settings, test-time augmentation often constitutes a light-weight alternative. Code is at: https://github.com/IML-DKFZ/values