From Presence Labels to Bounding Boxes: Can Multimodal Large Language Models Scale Surgical Instrument Localization?
Organizations: Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Qatar University, Doha, Qatar · Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar · College of Medicine, Qatar University, Doha, Qatar
Abstract
Spatial localization of surgical instruments through bounding-box annotations is a foundational component of surgical scene understanding, supporting detection, tracking, interaction analysis, and grounded vision-language applications. Yet existing annotations often cover selected frames, video subsets, or dataset variants rather than complete procedures. Manual extension is time-consuming and expert-dependent. Additionally, weakly supervised and detector-based pseudo-labels require task-specific training and may be imprecise. In this study, we design a scalable MLLM-based annotation framework that converts surgical frames and existing instrument-presence labels into accurate bounding boxes, and systematically analyze its reliability, cost, and design sensitivity. We instantiate the framework using six MLLMs and a multi-call configuration on laparoscopic cholecystectomy in Cholec80. Using a carefully designed stratification scheme, two annotators independently label 1,000 frames, and an expert surgeon reviews one annotation set to establish the reference. Results show that instrument-set F1 ranges from 88.2 to 92.7,whereas mIoU ranges from 0.180 to 0.735, showing that comparable recognition can conceal large localization differences. A structured multi-stage annotation pipeline achieves 0.784 mIoU, compared with 0.735 for the best single-call baseline and 0.814 human-human agreement. Using the best accuracy pipeline, we create and publicly release a spatial extension of Cholec80 comprising 285,977 bounding boxes across all 184,498 annotated frames from the 80 videos. The annotations and human references are made available on GitHub
Figures & tables
| Quality | Efficiency | ||||||
| Model | Workflow | Set F1 (%) | Count EM (%) | mIoU | Matched mIoU | Calls per frame | Cost (\downarrow$ |
| Cholec80 labels | – | 89.75 (baseline) | – | – | – | – | – |
| Llama 4 Maverick | Direct | 88.24 ( 1.51 pp) | 73.32 | 0.180 (22.1%) | 0.215 | 1.00 | 0.0017 |
| Claude Opus 4.8 | Direct | 90.85 (+1.10 pp) | 80.40 | 0.241 (29.6%) | 0.294 | 1.00 | 0.2180 |
| Grok 4.20 Reasoning | Direct | 90.68 (+0.93 pp) | 79.77 | 0.294 (36.1%) | 0.354 | 1.00 | 0.0017 |
| Gemma 4 26B | Direct | 88.65 ( 1.10 pp) | 75.21 | 0.461 (56.6%) | 0.570 | 1.00 | 0.0008 |
| Model | Test set — 16 held-out videos, 39,354 frames | Expert-verified subset — 197 frames, 238 boxes | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| mAP | AP 50 | AP 75 | F1 | mAP | AP 50 | AP 75 | F1 | |
| YOLOv8-x | 0.713 | 0.869 | 0.782 | 90.6 | 0.833 | 0.932 | 0.909 | 87.8 |
| RT-DETR-L | 0.710 | 0.869 | 0.781 | 89.8 | 0.839 | 0.937 | 0.901 | 88.3 |
| YOLO11-x | 0.709 | 0.866 | 0.777 | 90.6 | 0.823 | 0.918 | 0.884 | 86.7 |
| YOLO11-m | 0.703 | 0.862 | 0.772 | 90.5 | 0.811 | 0.907 | 0.887 | 86.1 |
| FCOS-R50 | 0.682 | 0.876 | 0.755 | 58.4 | 0.768 | 0.920 | 0.831 | 50.1 |
| Training labels | Frames | CholecSeg8k test (2,560 frames, 3,228 boxes) | AP 50 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| mAP | AP 50 | AP 75 | F1 | 95% CI (F1) | Grasper | Hook | |||
| A | CholecSeg8k masks (human) | 4,800 | 0.623 | 0.759 | 0.714 | 82.8 | [79.0, 87.5] | 0.722 | 0.524 |
| B | SurgBox pseudo-labels (none) | 79,564 | 0.833 | 0.973 | 0.929 | 95.1 | [92.5, 97.2] | 0.820 | 0.847 |
| C | SurgBox CholecSeg8k FT | 84,364 | 0.866 | 0.972 | 0.946 | 95.1 | [93.3, 96.9] | 0.860 | 0.873 |
LLM-Assisted Annotation
Large language model-assisted annotation uses AI to label, classify, and structure data, often with human review to improve scale and consistency.
See all 202 papers