TTDF: A Two-Stage Framework for Reliable Surgical Phase Transition Detection
Organizations: School of Computer Science, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK · STORM Lab UK · School of Electronic and Electrical Engineering, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
Abstract
Reliable workflow transition detection is important for context-aware surgical assistance and downstream decision support. However, online surgical phase recognizers primarily focus on frame-wise accuracy and temporal consistency, rather than the reliability of workflow transition events. Directly converting phase changes into events is unreliable: temporal jitter and workflow-illegal switches produce false or duplicate events, while persistent, workflow-consistent candidates may remain incorrect. To address this limitation, we formulate reliable workflow transition detection as a distinct event-level task operating on outputs of a frozen online phase recognizer. We propose the Two-Stage Transition Detection Framework (TTDF), a causal framework that progressively filters transition candidates. Transition Candidate Extraction (TCE) first applies a minimum-duration requirement and a workflow-graph constraint to remove false candidates caused by temporal jitter and phase transitions not allowed by the workflow graph. Specifically, a candidate is retained only if the predicted target phase persists for a minimum duration and the ordered phase pair belongs to the workflow graph's allowed transition set. TCE thereby produces a high-recall candidate set without additional training. Transition Candidate Verification (TCV) suppresses remaining false candidates using phase-posterior shifts and visual-change cues from frozen DINOv2 features. Events are assessed using a phase-pair-aware one-to-one matching protocol. Experiments on Cholec80 show that TTDF reduces false transition emissions while preserving recall and controlling decision delay.
Figures & tables
| Method | Prec. | Rec. | F1 | False/GT | Dup/GT | Delay 50 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Raw changes | 0.093 | 0.672 | 0.163 | 6.570 | 0.332 | 0.0 |
| + Dwell | 0.209 | 0.643 | 0.316 | 2.430 | 0.072 | 5.0 |
| + Legality (TCE) | 0.321 | 0.643 | 0.428 | 1.357 | 0.072 | 5.0 |
| + TCV (TTDF) | 0.470 | 0.531 | 0.497 | 0.603 | 0.013 | 6.3 |
| Cue | Emitted Events | F1 | False/GT | Dup/GT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Posterior | 245.6 61.0 | 0.475 0.025 | 0.557 0.173 | 0.013 |
| Posterior JS | 287.2 76.4 | 0.484 0.017 | 0.684 0.245 | 0.020 0.015 |
| Posterior +JS | 244.2 18.0 | 0.479 0.012 | 0.551 0.047 | 0.013 |
| Visual | 468.0 4.5 | 0.426 0.005 | 1.354 0.008 | 0.071 0.002 |
| Posterior + visual | 266.6 30.9 | 0.497 0.006 | 0.603 0.094 | 0.013 |
Surgical Video Understanding
Surgical video understanding uses computer vision and multimodal AI to interpret procedures, instruments, actions, and events over time.
See all 118 papers