ZeroDSS: Semantic Segmentation from Class Names Alone
Organizations: School of Computer Science, Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada
Abstract
Semantic segmentation depends heavily on real images with pixel-level annotations, making dense supervision a major obstacle to deployment in new domains. We study task-specific data-free semantic segmentation, where training uses generic pretrained generative priors but has access to no target-domain images, masks, or captions--only a predefined category set. We introduce Zero-Data Semantic Segmentation (ZeroDSS), a feedback-driven approach that treats synthetic supervision as an adaptively controllable training distribution rather than a direct surrogate for real data. ZeroDSS constructs a semantically structured prompt distribution through LLM-guided compositional generation and adaptive class rebalancing, then converts the prompts into image-mask pairs using diffusion attention. Its feedback-driven distribution refinement consists of a two-phase closed-loop training procedure with a single loop-back step. In Phase I, a segmenter is trained using confidence-weighted supervision and dual-scale consistency. In Phase II, model feedback is used to adaptively target underperforming categories and refine diffusion-derived masks using model predictions. After this refined initial training, a teacher-student framework is utilized in the final phase to iteratively improve the fused supervision and segmenter through exponential moving average (EMA) updates. Using synthetic training data only, ZeroDSS achieves 35.0% mIoU on MS COCO with DeepLabV3, and 66.3% and 63.5% mIoU on PASCAL VOC with DeepLabV3 and Mask2Former, respectively. These results show that explicitly constructing and iteratively refining the synthetic supervision distribution can substantially reduce the synthetic-to-real gap in dense prediction.
Figures & tables
| Training Setting | Method | COCO(DLV3) | VOC(DLV3) | VOC(M2F) |
| Fully Supervised Reference: Real Images & Annotations | GT training | 48.9 | 79.3 | 78.8 |
| Open-Vocabulary Segmentation Models | CLIPSeg [ 10 ] | 23.4 | 54.2 | |
| MaskCLIP [ 5 ] | 25.1 | 56.9 | ||
| Synthetic Data with Real Dataset Captions | Dataset Diffusion † [ 19 ] | 28.6 | 58.0 | 57.8 |
| DiffuMask [ 33 ] | – | – | 57.4 | |
| SDS [ 28 ] | 31.0 | 60.4 | 59.8 | |
| Pseudo-label source | mIoU(%) |
| Original attention mask only | 33.5 |
| Teacher prediction only | 34.4 |
| Class-wise fusion | 35.0 |
| VOC + 5 Novel | VOC + 10 Novel | ||||||
| Subset | Dataset Diffusion | CLIPSeg | ZeroDSS (Phase I-II) | Subset | Dataset Diffusion | CLIPSeg | ZeroDSS (Phase I-II) |
| VOC (21) | 58.1 | 55.0 | 60.5 | VOC (21) | 57.5 | 55.8 | 59.9 |
| Novel(5) | 1.02 | 23.3 | 27.1 | Novel(10) | 0.38 | 21.9 | 25.9 |
| All(26) | 47.1 | 49.0 | 54.7 | All(31) | 39.1 | 44.9 | 48.9 |
Appendix figures & tables6 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Semantic Segmentation
Semantic segmentation assigns a class label to every image pixel, enabling detailed scene understanding across domains and sensors.
See all 399 papers