SigVLP: Sigmoid Volume-Language Pre-Training for Self-Supervised CT-Volume Adaptive Representation Learning
Organizations: Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Germany · Department of Quantitative Biomedicine, University of Zurich, Switzerland · ETH AI Center, ETH Zurich, Switzerland · International School of Medicine, Istanbul Medipol University, Turkey ·
Abstract
Large-scale, volumetric medical imaging datasets typically aggregate scans from different vendors and devices, resulting in highly variable resolution, slice thicknesses, and numbers of slices per study. Consequently, training representation models usually requires cropping or interpolating along the z-axis to obtain fixed-size blocks, which inevitably causes information loss. We propose a new training approach to overcome this limitation. Instead of absolute position embeddings, we interpret volumes as sequences of 3D chunks and adopt Rotary Position Embeddings, allowing us to treat the z-axis as an unconstrained temporal dimensions. Building on this idea, we introduce a new vision-language model: SigVLP. In SigVLP, we implement Rotary Position Embedding as the positional encoding method, which is applied directly within the attention operation, generating input-conditioned sine and cosine weights on the fly. This design ensures consistent alignment between query and key projections and adapts to any input sizes. To allow for variable input size during training, we sample Computed Tomography volumes in chunks and pair them with localized organ-wise textual observations. Compared to using entire reports for conditioning, chunkwise alignment provides finer-grained supervision, enabling the model to establish stronger correlations between the text and volume representations, thereby improving the precision of text-to-volume alignment. Our models are trained with the Muon optimizer and evaluated on a diverse set of downstream tasks, including zero-shot abnormality and organ classification, segmentation, and retrieval tasks.
Figures & tables
| Model | R@5 | R@10 | R@50 | MeanRank |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SigLIPv2-L [ 41 ] | 0.047 0.007 | 0.101 0.009 | 0.504 0.011 | 50.53 0.39 |
| CT-Clip [ 13 ] | 0.204 0.038 | 0.348 0.052 | 0.835 0.049 | 26.01 3.01 |
| CT-Vocab [ 13 ] | 0.055 0.012 | 0.107 0.015 | 0.517 0.013 | 49.12 0.80 |
| Dinov3-Clip [ 10 ] | 0.047 0.020 | 0.107 0.027 | 0.501 0.024 | 50.53 1.06 |
| Ours | 0.636 0.050 | 0.769 0.036 | 0.978 0.010 | 8.23 0.947 |
| Classification | Segmentation (Dice) | Segmentation (Overall) | ||||||||
| Backbone | Precision | Recall | F1 | Accuracy | AUROC | Task01 | Task02 | Task03 | mDice | mIoU |
| (lung_left) | (Aorta) | (Stomach) | ||||||||
| SigLIPv2-L [ 41 ] | 0.362 0.041 | 0.518 0.038 | 0.388 0.028 | 0.756 0.013 | 0.706 0.028 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 0.000 | 0.000 0.000 |
| CT-CLIP [ 13 ] | 0.288 0.065 | 0.424 0.044 | 0.305 0.048 | 0.764 0.016 | 0.639 0.031 | 0.105 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.013 0.029 | 0.007 0.015 |
| CT-Vocab [ 13 ] | 0.300 0.060 | 0.463 0.031 | 0.333 0.036 | 0.765 0.019 | 0.653 0.042 | 0.005 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 0.000 | 0.000 0.000 |
| DINOv3-S [ 37 ] | 0.330 0.025 | 0.815 0.032 | 0.455 0.029 | 0.516 0.011 | 0.651 0.023 | 0.816 | 0.002 | 0.237 | 0.292 0.257 | 0.226 0.201 |
| Classification (Linear Probe) | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Method | 32 slices | 64 slices | 128 slices | ||||||||||||
| Precision | Recall | F1 | AUC | mAP | Precision | Recall | F1 | AUC | mAP | Precision | Recall | F1 | AUC | mAP | |
| SigLIPv2-L [ 41 ] | 0.499 0.399 | 0.494 0.491 | 0.496 0.367 | 0.523 0.251 | 0.542 0.345 | 0.599 0.393 | 0.614 0.397 | 0.607 0.332 | 0.630 0.215 | 0.592 0.364 | 0.665 0.349 | 0.767 0.380 | 0.712 0.381 | 0.652 0.189 | 0.705 0.324 |
| CT-CLIP [ 13 ] | 0.792 0.396 | 0.668 0.491 | 0.725 0.440 | 0.840 0.076 | 0.661 0.204 | 0.832 0.427 | 0.745 0.500 | 0.786 0.455 | 0.879 0.100 | 0.696 0.268 | 0.851 0.421 | 0.871 0.471 | 0.861 0.437 | 0.895 0.075 | 0.699 0.288 |
| CT-Vocab [ 13 ] | 0.819 0.360 | 0.661 0.467 | 0.731 0.420 | 0.850 0.060 | 0.668 0.187 | 0.937 0.441 | 0.711 0.495 | 0.809 0.481 | 0.894 0.106 | 0.682 0.306 | 0.851 0.421 | 0.871 0.471 | 0.861 0.437 | 0.877 0.081 | 0.671 0.299 |
| Dinov3-S [ 37 ] | 0.982 0.436 | 0.919 0.458 | 0.950 0.446 | 0.990 0.120 | 0.517 0.387 | 0.942 0.437 | 0.893 0.458 | 0.917 0.446 | 0.979 0.122 | 0.567 0.388 | 0.915 0.363 | 0.924 0.404 | 0.920 0.380 | 0.966 0.123 | 0.726 0.350 |
| R@5 | R@10 | R@50 | MeanRank | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.399 0.049 | 0.547 0.037 | 0.915 0.026 | 16.69 1.70 | |
| 0.636 0.050 | 0.769 0.036 | 0.978 0.010 | 8.23 0.947 | |
| 0.351 0.052 | 0.480 0.048 | 0.899 0.025 | 19.44 1.85 |
Appendix figures & tables8 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
| Ours | DINOV3 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Slices Count | FLOP/sample | Latency (ms) | FLOP/s | FLOP/sample | Latency (ms) | FLOP/s |
| 256 | 2.080 TFLOP | 147.692 | 14.09 | 5.720 TFLOP | 137.422 | 41.62 |
| 128 | 0.834 TFLOP | 53.896 | 15.47 | 2.860 TFLOP | 69.674 | 41.04 |
| 64 | 0.365 TFLOP | 24.588 | 14.86 | 1.430 TFLOP | 36.035 | 39.68 |
| 32 | 0.170 TFLOP | 23.010 | 7.38 | 0.715 TFLOP | 18.440 | 38.78 |
| 16 | 0.082 TFLOP | 22.758 | 3.59 | 0.358 TFLOP | 9.423 | 37.93 |
| Slices Num. | Pad method | Precision | Recall | F1 | AUC | mAP |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Repeat | 0.931 | 0.906 | 0.918 | 0.986 | 0.936 |
| 1 | Zero Pad | 0.830 | 0.750 | 0.788 | 0.922 | 0.778 |
| 8 | Repeat | 0.951 | 0.925 | 0.938 | 0.990 | 0.960 |
| 8 | Zero Pad | 0.930 | 0.919 | 0.925 | 0.986 | 0.943 |
| Model | R@1 | R@5 | R@10 | R@50 | R@100 | MeanRank | mAP |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SigLIPv2-L [ 41 ] | 0.002 | 0.003 | 0.007 | 0.033 | 0.065 | 751.77 | 0.006 |
| CT-CLIP [ 13 ] | 0.007 | 0.029 | 0.045 | 0.161 | 0.263 | 378.39 | 0.024 |
| CT-Vocab [ 13 ] | 0.001 | 0.004 | 0.007 | 0.035 | 0.071 | 729.09 | 0.006 |
| DINOv3-CLIP [ 10 ] | 0.001 | 0.003 | 0.008 | 0.030 | 0.064 | 751.70 | 0.006 |
| Ours | 0.098 | 0.251 | 0.336 | 0.599 | 0.730 | 107.13 | 0.180 |
Medical VLMs
Medical vision-language models connect clinical images with text for diagnosis, reporting, question answering, and image grounding.
See all 475 papers