Real-time, on-device segmentation is critical for latency-sensitive and privacy-aware applications such as smart glasses and Internet-of-Things devices. We introduce PicoSAM3, a lightweight promptable visual segmentation model optimized for edge and in-sensor execution, including deployment on the Sony IMX500 vision sensor. PicoSAM3 has 1.3M parameters and combines a dense CNN architecture with region of interest prompt encoding, Efficient Channel Attention, and knowledge distillation from SAM2 and SAM3. On COCO and LVIS, PicoSAM3 achieves 65.45% and 64.01% mIoU, respectively, outperforming existing SAM-based and edge-oriented baselines at similar or lower complexity. The INT8 quantized model preserves accuracy with negligible degradation while enabling real-time in-sensor inference at 11.82ms latency on the IMX500, fully complying with its memory and operator constraints. Ablation studies show that distillation from large SAM models yields up to +14.5% mIoU improvement over supervised training and demonstrate that high-quality, spatially flexible promptable segmentation is feasible directly at the sensor level.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Hardware setup: PicoSAM3 runs directly in the Sony IMX500 camera, the ARM Cortex A76 is only used to deploy the model.
Complexity ↓
mIoU (%) ↑
Latency (ms) ↓
Model
Prompt
Params (M)
MACs
COCO
LVIS
Size (MB)
GPU
IMX500
SAM-H [ 1 ]
–
635
2.97T
53.6
60.5
2420.3
2390
–
FastSAM [ 32 ]
–
72.2
443G
51.6
55.2
275.6
153.6
–
TinySAM [ 23 ]
–
9.7
42G
50.9
52.1
37.0
38.4
–
EdgeSAM [ 24 ]
–
9.7
42G
48.0
53.7
37.0
38.4
–
LiteSAM [ 26 ]
–
4.2
4.2G
49.0
51.2
16.0
16.0
–
Table I : Comparison of edge segmentation models. GPU latency measured on NVIDIA T4, DPU latency on Sony IMX500 (when available).
Figure 2: Segmentation precision (mAP and mIoU) versus model size (log scale) across model families.
Model
Distillation
ROI
COCO
LVIS
mAP
mIoU
mAP
mIoU
PicoSAM2 [ 5 ]
×
×
30.67
53.00
20.38
41.40
×
✓
22.68
50.94
21.20
48.44
SAM2 [ 2 ]
×
29.96
51.93
25.46
44.88
SAM2 [ 2 ]
✓
40.52
63.11
40.12
61.80
SAM3 [ 3 ]
✓
41.13
63.51
40.94
62.31
Table II : Ablation results for region of interest cropped inputs across datasets, distillation teachers and architectures.
Dataset
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
mIoU
mAP
mIoU
mAP
mIoU
mAP
mIoU
mAP
mIoU
mAP
COCO
0.569
0.302
0.627
0.395
0.653
0.435
0.613
0.380
0.557
0.304
LVIS
0.561
0.311
0.616
0.398
0.637
0.429
0.599
0.375
0.545
0.302
Table III: Effect of ROI padding percentage p on inference-time performance (model trained with p=10% ). Results confirm p=10% is the optimal context window.
Dataset
0%
5%
10%
20%
mIoU
mAP
mIoU
mAP
mIoU
mAP
mIoU
mAP
COCO
0.653
0.435
0.644
0.422
0.625
0.394
0.581
0.330
LVIS
0.637
0.429
0.629
0.417
0.611
0.391
0.569
0.329
Table IV: PicoSAM3 robustness to spatial bounding box perturbations (mean ± std over 5 trials). Each column shows a perturbation level expressed as a fraction of the ground-truth bbox size (uniform center shift ±s/2 , Gaussian dimension noise σ=s/2 ).
Dataset
0 competitors
1-2 competitors
3+ competitors
mIoU
mAP
mIoU
mAP
mIoU
mAP
COCO
0.706
0.504
0.637
0.411
0.565
0.329
LVIS
0.682
0.478
0.638
0.432
0.521
0.299
Table V: Segmentation performance stratified by number of competing objects whose centre falls inside the padded bounding-box crop.
Figure 3: Qualitative comparison of each model’s mask inference.