OSA: Echocardiography Video Segmentation via Orthogonalized State Update and Anatomical Prior-aware Feature Enhancement
arXiv:2603.26188v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Accurate and temporally consistent segmentation of the left ventricle from echocardiography videos is essential for estimating the ejection fraction and assessing cardiac function. However, modeling spatiotemporal dynamics remains difficult due to severe speckle noise and rapid non-rigid deformations. Existing linear recurrent models offer efficient in-context associative recall for temporal tracking, but rely on unconstrained state updates, which cause progressive singular value decay in the state matrix, a phenomenon known as rank collapse, res — Rui Wang, Huisi Wu, Jing Qin
View PDF HTML (experimental)
Abstract:Accurate and temporally consistent segmentation of the left ventricle from echocardiography videos is essential for estimating the ejection fraction and assessing cardiac function. However, modeling spatiotemporal dynamics remains difficult due to severe speckle noise and rapid non-rigid deformations. Existing linear recurrent models offer efficient in-context associative recall for temporal tracking, but rely on unconstrained state updates, which cause progressive singular value decay in the state matrix, a phenomenon known as rank collapse, resulting in anatomical details being overwhelmed by noise. To address this, we propose OSA, a framework that constrains the state evolution on the Stiefel manifold. We introduce the Orthogonalized State Update (OSU) mechanism, which formulates the memory evolution as Euclidean projected gradient descent on the Stiefel manifold to prevent rank collapse and maintain stable temporal transitions. Furthermore, an Anatomical Prior-aware Feature Enhancement module explicitly separates anatomical structures from speckle noise through a physics-driven process, providing the temporal tracker with noise-resilient structural cues. Comprehensive experiments on the CAMUS and EchoNet-Dynamic datasets show that OSA achieves state-of-the-art segmentation accuracy and temporal stability, while maintaining real-time inference efficiency for clinical deployment. Codes are available at this https URL.
Subjects:
Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (cs.CV)
Cite as: arXiv:2603.26188 [cs.CV]
(or arXiv:2603.26188v1 [cs.CV] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2603.26188
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
Submission history
From: Rui Wang [view email] [v1] Fri, 27 Mar 2026 09:02:16 UTC (12,740 KB)
Sign in to highlight and annotate this article

Conversation starters
Daily AI Digest
Get the top 5 AI stories delivered to your inbox every morning.
More about
researchpaperarxiv![First time NeurIPS. How different is it from low-ranked conferences? [D]](https://d2xsxph8kpxj0f.cloudfront.net/310419663032563854/konzwo8nGf8Z4uZsMefwMr/default-img-robot-hand-JvPW6jsLFTCtkgtb97Kys5.webp)
First time NeurIPS. How different is it from low-ranked conferences? [D]
I'm a PhD student and already published papers in A/B ranked paper (10+). My field of work never allowed me to work on something really exciting and a core A* conference. But finally after years I think I have work worthy of some discussion at the top venue. I'm referring to papers (my field and top papers) from previous editions and I notice that there's a big difference on how people write, how they put their message on table and also it is too theoretical sometimes. Are there any golden rules people follow who frequently get into these conferences? Should I be soft while making novelty claims? Also those who moved from submitting to niche-conferences to NeurIPS/ICML/CVPR, did you change your approach? My field is imaging in healthcare. submitted by /u/ade17_in [link] [comments]

AI can describe human experiences but lacks experience in an actual ‘body.’ UCLA researchers say understanding this ‘body gap’ may matter for safety - UCLA Health
AI can describe human experiences but lacks experience in an actual ‘body.’ UCLA researchers say understanding this ‘body gap’ may matter for safety UCLA Health

New IAEA Research Project Uses Machine Learning to Better Predict Polymer Changes under Radiation - International Atomic Energy Agency
New IAEA Research Project Uses Machine Learning to Better Predict Polymer Changes under Radiation International Atomic Energy Agency
Knowledge Map
Connected Articles — Knowledge Graph
This article is connected to other articles through shared AI topics and tags.
More in Research Papers

Label-free pathological subtyping of non-small cell lung cancer using deep classification and virtual immunohistochemical staining
npj Digital Medicine, Published online: 03 April 2026; doi:10.1038/s41746-026-02557-x Label-free pathological subtyping of non-small cell lung cancer using deep classification and virtual immunohistochemical staining
![First time NeurIPS. How different is it from low-ranked conferences? [D]](https://d2xsxph8kpxj0f.cloudfront.net/310419663032563854/konzwo8nGf8Z4uZsMefwMr/default-img-robot-hand-JvPW6jsLFTCtkgtb97Kys5.webp)
First time NeurIPS. How different is it from low-ranked conferences? [D]
I'm a PhD student and already published papers in A/B ranked paper (10+). My field of work never allowed me to work on something really exciting and a core A* conference. But finally after years I think I have work worthy of some discussion at the top venue. I'm referring to papers (my field and top papers) from previous editions and I notice that there's a big difference on how people write, how they put their message on table and also it is too theoretical sometimes. Are there any golden rules people follow who frequently get into these conferences? Should I be soft while making novelty claims? Also those who moved from submitting to niche-conferences to NeurIPS/ICML/CVPR, did you change your approach? My field is imaging in healthcare. submitted by /u/ade17_in [link] [comments]




Discussion
Sign in to join the discussion
No comments yet — be the first to share your thoughts!