Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI Research

aiqbench analysis

This research introduces the Sustainability-Aware Performance Index (SAPI) to evaluate biomedical segmentation models by balancing accuracy against energy consumption and computational cost. The study demonstrates that larger foundation models do not consistently deliver proportional performance gains, offering a practical framework for selecting more efficient and environmentally responsible AI solutions in scientific computing.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Performance at What Cost? A Sustainability-Aware Performance Index for Cell and Nucleus Instance Segmentation

arXiv3 min read

arXiv:2610.10324v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Pretrained models for cell and nuclear instance segmentation differ substantially in architecture, pretraining data and objectives, parameter count, inference strategy, adaptation requirements, postprocessing pipeline, and computational demand. Large pretrained and foundation models are increasingly adopted because of their strong zero-shot capabilities, but their use also imposes greater energy consumption, memory requirements, computational demands, adaptation costs, and operational carbon emissions. Whether these additional demands are justified by meaningful gains in segmentation performance remains unclear. We address this question by introducing the Sustainability-Aware Performance Index (SAPI), a configurable metric that combines segmentation performance, energy consumption, and model size. We benchmark 19 pretrained and foundation models across six CellBinDB datasets under zero-shot inference and evaluate 16 fine-tunable models using few-shot adaptation with both frozen encoder and full-model fine-tuning. We estimate energy consumption for GPU, CPU, and RAM using software-based monitoring tools. Our results show that larger and more computationally demanding models do not consistently achieve proportionate improvements in segmentation quality. While few-shot adaptation benefits several models, the gains and resource costs vary considerably across architectures, datasets, and adaptation strategies, causing SAPI-based rankings to differ from rankings based on performance alone. This study provides a practical framework for comparing segmentation models more comprehensively and supports more computationally accessible and environmentally responsible model selection in biomedical image analysis.

Title:Performance at What Cost? A Sustainability-Aware Performance Index for Cell and Nucleus Instance Segmentation

Abstract:Pretrained models for cell and nuclear instance segmentation differ substantially in architecture, pretraining data and objectives, parameter count, inference strategy, adaptation requirements, postprocessing pipeline, and computational demand. Large pretrained and foundation models are increasingly adopted because of their strong zero-shot capabilities, but their use also imposes greater energy consumption, memory requirements, computational demands, adaptation costs, and operational carbon emissions. Whether these additional demands are justified by meaningful gains in segmentation performance remains unclear. We address this question by introducing the Sustainability-Aware Performance Index (SAPI), a configurable metric that combines segmentation performance, energy consumption, and model size. We benchmark 19 pretrained and foundation models across six CellBinDB datasets under zero-shot inference and evaluate 16 fine-tunable models using few-shot adaptation with both frozen encoder and full-model fine-tuning. We estimate energy consumption for GPU, CPU, and RAM using software-based monitoring tools. Our results show that larger and more computationally demanding models do not consistently achieve proportionate improvements in segmentation quality. While few-shot adaptation benefits several models, the gains and resource costs vary considerably across architectures, datasets, and adaptation strategies, causing SAPI-based rankings to differ from rankings based on performance alone. This study provides a practical framework for comparing segmentation models more comprehensively and supports more computationally accessible and environmentally responsible model selection in biomedical image analysis.

Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (cs.CV); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)

arXiv:2610.10324 [cs.CV]

(or arXiv:2610.10324v1 [cs.CV] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.10324 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 327 words

Related coverage