Table 11.

Performance comparison of various methods and results from our ablation study. The “LOSS” column indicates integration with auxiliary losses, “DAL” refers to dense auxiliary losses, “SHT” represents our skipped-layer scheme, and “RANDOM” involves three arbitrary auxiliary losses from Conv1 to Conv5. Rows 5 and 6 present outcomes for the Universal Lesion Detection (ULD) task, while rows 7 through 9 detail the Multi-Organ Lesion Detection (MOLD) task.

3DCE?	DENSE?	DA?	LOSS?	Sen@2 ± std	Sen@4 ± std	AS@2 ± std	AS@4 ± std	mAP ± std
✔				78.99 ± 1.12	84.39 ± 0.58	56.80 ± 2.46	65.08 ± 2.34	32.43 ± 1.66
✔		✔		77.67 ± 0.36	83.33 ± 0.53	60.02 ± 1.02	67.32 ± 1.13	35.74 ± 1.40
✔	✔			79.36 ± 0.77	84.47 ± 0.24	63.58 ± 0.38	71.42 ± 0.26	37.99 ± 0.17
✔	✔		DAL	79.78 ± 0.95	85.10 ± 0.94	65.17 ± 0.72	71.33 ± 1.28	36.76 ± 1.47
✔	✔	✔	DAL	79.84 ± 0.85	84.79 ± 0.35	66.25 ± 0.33	73.20 ± 0.13	40.29 ± 0.18
✔	✔	✔	RANDOM	79.93 ± 0.87	84.69 ± 0.36	66.30 ± 0.34	73.63 ± 0.14	40.38 ± 0.40
✔	✔	✔	SHT	79.99 ± 0.24	84.8 ± 0.22	67.29 ± 0.12	73.88 ± 0.17	40.39 ± 0.41