Organizations: Fudan University, Shanghai, China · University of Macau, Macau, China · The Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China · Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China
Fine-grained action segmentation during renorrhaphy in robot-assisted partial nephrectomy requires frame-level recognition of visually similar suturing gestures with variable duration and substantial class imbalance. The SIA-RAPN benchmark defines this problem on 50 clinical videos acquired with the da Vinci Xi system and annotated with 12 frame-level labels. The benchmark compares four temporal models built on I3D features: MS-TCN++, AsFormer, TUT, and DiffAct. Evaluation uses balanced accuracy, edit score, segmental F1 at overlap thresholds of 10, 25, and 50, frame-wise accuracy, and frame-wise mean average precision. In addition to the primary evaluation across five released split configurations on SIA-RAPN, the benchmark reports cross-domain results on a separate single-port RAPN dataset. Across the strongest reported values over those five runs on the primary dataset, DiffAct achieves the highest F1, frame-wise accuracy, edit score, and frame mAP, while MS-TCN++ attains the highest balanced accuracy.
Figures & tables
Model
F1@10
F1@25
F1@50
Acc
Bal-Acc
Edit
Frame mAP
MS-TCN++
76.54
71.96
58.02
68.83
67.54
74.93
48.79
AsFormer
79.60
73.78
57.87
64.55
58.73
78.00
40.08
TUT
76.04
71.03
57.62
61.86
54.57
76.28
37.61
DiffAct
83.14
80.23
66.86
72.12
67.16
82.30
51.28
Table 1: Summary comparison using the strongest reported value for each metric across the five splits.
Split
F1@{10,25,50}
Acc
Bal-Acc
Edit
Frame mAP
Split 1
0.7845 / 0.7378 / 0.5635
0.6348
0.5752
0.7568
0.3936
Split 2
0.7804 / 0.7147 / 0.5751
0.6302
0.5664
0.7800
0.3927
Split 3
0.7131 / 0.6346 / 0.4477
0.5498
0.4953
0.7271
0.3079
Split 4
0.7653 / 0.6937 / 0.5279
0.6304
0.5873
0.7461
0.4008
Split 5
0.7960 / 0.7309 / 0.5787
0.6455
0.5745
0.7872
0.3968
Table 2: AsFormer per-split performance on the primary SIA-RAPN benchmark.
Split
F1@{10,25,50}
Acc
Bal-Acc
Edit
Frame mAP
Split 1
0.7604 / 0.7103 / 0.5762
0.6186
0.5457
0.7628
0.3761
Split 2
0.7498 / 0.6885 / 0.5415
0.6147
0.5447
0.7242
0.3677
Split 3
0.7295 / 0.6749 / 0.5076
0.5975
0.5167
0.7364
0.3398
Split 4
0.7361 / 0.6729 / 0.5279
0.5866
0.5119
0.7542
0.3471
Split 5
0.7421 / 0.7022 / 0.5567
0.5992
0.5203
0.7421
0.3621
Table 3: TUT per-split performance on the primary SIA-RAPN benchmark.
Split
F1@{10,25,50}
Acc
Bal-Acc
Edit
Frame mAP
Split 1
0.7491 / 0.6961 / 0.5318
0.6446
0.6120
0.7357
0.4203
Split 2
0.7542 / 0.7149 / 0.5630
0.6651
0.5994
0.7426
0.4300
Split 3
0.7609 / 0.7144 / 0.5637
0.6836
0.6534
0.7477
0.4768
Split 4
0.7259 / 0.6879 / 0.5534
0.6499
0.5866
0.7200
0.4148
Split 5
0.7654 / 0.7196 / 0.5802
0.6883
0.6754
0.7493
0.4879
Table 4: MS-TCN++ per-split performance on the primary SIA-RAPN benchmark.
Split
F1@{10,25,50}
Acc
Bal-Acc
Edit
Frame mAP
Split 1
0.8274 / 0.8023 / 0.6654
0.7166
0.6541
0.8158
0.5017
Split 2
0.8012 / 0.7600 / 0.6268
0.6679
0.5982
0.8021
0.4291
Split 3
0.8207 / 0.7836 / 0.6686
0.7103
0.6573
0.8230
0.4942
Split 4
0.8314 / 0.7926 / 0.6589
0.7059
0.6563
0.8132
0.4861
Split 5
0.8291 / 0.7918 / 0.6536
0.7212
0.6716
0.8205
0.5128
Table 5: DiffAct per-split performance on the primary SIA-RAPN benchmark.
Split
F1@{10,25,50}
Acc
Bal-Acc
Edit
Frame mAP
Split 1
0.7414 / 0.6729 / 0.4361
0.5985
0.5157
0.7547
0.2947
Split 2
0.7099 / 0.6049 / 0.4444
0.5724
0.5040
0.7368
0.3066
Split 3
0.7203 / 0.6302 / 0.4759
0.6009
0.5369
0.6984
0.3129
Split 4
0.7143 / 0.6211 / 0.4596
0.5731
0.5855
0.6749
0.3179
Split 5
0.7055 / 0.6196 / 0.3926
0.5894
0.5270
0.7523
0.3084
Table 6: DiffAct per-split performance on the single-port cross-domain dataset.
Split
F1@{10,25,50}
Acc
Bal-Acc
Edit
Frame mAP
Split 1
0.7439 / 0.6201 / 0.4012
0.5489
0.5479
0.7514
0.2835
Split 2
0.6748 / 0.5636 / 0.3273
0.4980
0.4031
0.7241
0.2315
Split 3
0.6647 / 0.5612 / 0.2866
0.4400
0.3782
0.6592
0.1962
Split 4
0.6890 / 0.5775 / 0.3222
0.5060
0.5425
0.6994
0.2630
Split 5
0.7089 / 0.5849 / 0.3270
0.4876
0.4548
0.7531
0.2229
Table 7: AsFormer per-split performance on the single-port cross-domain dataset.
Split
F1@{10,25,50}
Acc
Bal-Acc
Edit
Frame mAP
Split 1
0.6609 / 0.5698 / 0.3605
0.5383
0.4811
0.6170
0.2763
Split 2
0.6952 / 0.6132 / 0.4126
0.5249
0.4767
0.6425
0.2816
Split 3
0.6301 / 0.5533 / 0.3919
0.4820
0.4051
0.6597
0.2183
Split 4
0.6762 / 0.5886 / 0.3438
0.5508
0.5221
0.6684
0.2781
Split 5
0.6592 / 0.5690 / 0.3662
0.5407
0.4791
0.6683
0.2738
Table 8: TUT per-split performance on the single-port cross-domain dataset.
Split
F1@{10,25,50}
Acc
Bal-Acc
Edit
Frame mAP
Split 1
0.5277 / 0.4286 / 0.2468
0.4330
0.4221
0.5577
0.2078
Split 2
0.5696 / 0.4401 / 0.2330
0.4710
0.4470
0.5192
0.2264
Split 3
0.5263 / 0.4637 / 0.2561
0.4754
0.4401
0.5449
0.2326
Split 4
0.4986 / 0.4000 / 0.2197
0.4721
0.4219
0.5053
0.2283
Split 5
0.4354 / 0.3618 / 0.2041
0.3864
0.3474
0.4231
0.1726
Table 9: MS-TCN++ per-split performance on the single-port cross-domain dataset.
Automated recognition of surgical phases and steps is a fundamental capability for intraoperative decision support, workflow automation, and skill assessment in robotic-assisted surgery. Existing approaches either depend on large-scale annotated surgical datasets or require expensive domain-specific pretraining on thousands of labeled videos, limiting their practical deployability across diverse robotic platforms and clinical environments. In this work, we propose TASOT (Text-Augmented Action Segmentation Optimal Transport), an annotation-free framework for surgical temporal segmentation that requires no task-specific annotations or surgical-domain pretraining. TASOT extends the Action Segmentation Optimal Transport (ASOT) formulation by incorporating temporally aligned textual descriptions generated directly from the input video, fusing visual and semantic cues within a unified unbalanced Gromov-Wasserstein optimal transport objective. Visual representations are extracted using DINOv3, while temporal captions produced by a vision-language model are encoded via CLIP and temporally aligned to individual frames, providing complementary semantic structure to the transport cost. We evaluate TASOT on three public surgical datasets and four benchmark settings spanning laparoscopic and robotic procedures, showing substantial improvements over the strongest zero-shot baselines: +18.9 F1 on Cholec80, +33.7 on AutoLaparo, +23.7 on StrasByPass70, and +4.5 on BernByPass70. These results suggest that fine-grained surgical workflow understanding in robotic settings can be achieved without manual training annotations or surgical-specific pretraining pipelines, offering a promising alternative for real-world robotic surgical systems.
Omar Mohamed, Edoardo Fazzari, Ayah Al-Naji +5
Authos are with the Dept. of Robotics, Mohamed bin Zayed University of AI, Abu Dhabi, UAE.
Fine-grained understanding of operating room (OR) activity could enable workflow-aware assistance, yet remains difficult due to clutter, occlusions, and limited sensing. The prevailing approach to model this environment is scene graphs as an interpretable representation of OR interactions. Converting their frame-wise relational predictions into temporally extended, fine-grained actions however, is challenging without explicit temporal modeling. To enable a principled temporal evaluation of current OR understanding methods, we introduce the first action-centric benchmark built on a publicly available ego-exocentric OR dataset by defining a fine-grained, multi-role action taxonomy and generating dense action segments via distillation from ground-truth scene graph state changes. Experiments on this benchmark show that current scene graph prediction methods struggle to model temporal structure, even when adding explicit modeling through Graph Neural Networks. We therefore introduce a vision-only temporal model that outperforms graph-based methods significantly when using all available egocentric video as input. Building on this model we also introduce a novel multi- to single-view feature alignment strategy that improves single-view performance on multi-role action recognition, mitigating the need for extensive egocentric video capture. Benchmark and code will be released upon acceptance.
Felix Tristram, Ege Özsoy, Christian Benz +3
Technical University of Munich, Germany · Munich Center for Machine Learning (MCML) · Carl Zeiss AG, Germany
Accurate segmentation of surgical instruments in robotic-assisted surgery is critical for enabling context-aware computer-assisted interventions, such as tool tracking, workflow analysis, and autonomous decision-making. In this study, we benchmark five deep learning architectures-UNet, UNet, DeepLabV3, Attention UNet, and SegFormer on the SAR-RARP50 dataset for multi-class semantic segmentation of surgical instruments in real-world radical prostatectomy videos. The models are trained with a compound loss function combining Cross Entropy and Dice loss to address class imbalance and capture fine object boundaries. Our experiments reveal that while convolutional models such as UNet and Attention UNet provide strong baseline performance, DeepLabV3 achieves results comparable to SegFormer, demonstrating the effectiveness of atrous convolution and multi-scale context aggregation in capturing complex surgical scenes. Transformer-based architectures like SegFormer further enhance global contextual understanding, leading to improved generalization across varying instrument appearances and surgical conditions. This work provides a comprehensive comparison and practical insights for selecting segmentation models in surgical AI applications, highlighting the trade-offs between convolutional and transformer-based approaches.