Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2609.15130

woma: a real-time foundation model and its fine-tuned models for endoscopy

Abstract

woma is a real-time foundation model for gastrointestinal endoscopy: a network trained without labels on about a million endoscopy frames, from which task models are fine-tuned. We contribute a systematic design for production. Requirements and pass marks were fixed before any run, eight candidates screened under pre-registered rules, self-supervised training taken to a stopping rule, then fine-tuning and deployment optimisation, all on one self-contained library, numbat. We also contribute woma itself with two fine-tuned models, every outcome reported met or missed. Our colonoscopy model finds and outlines polyps, names which colon segment is in view, suggests polyp type and grades bowel preparation. Our gastroscopy model names a station out of 22 protocol sites, flags and outlines lesions, and names one of seven findings. Every number was read on data never seen in training, and shipped weights were chosen on that record. In colonoscopy, 96% of polyps in a six-hospital PolypGen set are found at precision >=0.85, and 19 of 19 polyps across fifteen full REAL-Colon videos at 1.6 false alarms per procedure. In gastroscopy, landmark region is named correctly on 92% of frames from unseen patients, and 37 of 39 held-out neoplasia frames are flagged at specificity 0.91. On one workstation GPU every task runs over 1080p video at about 100 frames per second, faster than PyTorch, ONNX Runtime and TensorRT in all four precision regimes tested. TensorRT comes closest: one pass of our foundation model takes it 3 to 27% longer than ours, and we deliver 6 to 31% more frames per second from frame to results. A second build links no vendor library at all -- our own kernels over Vulkan -- so a site deploys two files and needs no toolkit, no cuDNN and no framework; in f32 it beats the CUDA build on the same card.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Thang Tran, Lan Dang. 2026-09-14. woma: a real-time foundation model and its fine-tuned models for endoscopy. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.15130

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Is Vibe Coding Safe? Benchmarking Vulnerability of Agent-Generated Code in Real-World Tasks

Vibe coding is a new software development paradigm in which human engineers prompt a large language model (LLM) agent to complete complex coding tasks with little supervision. Although vibe coding is increasingly adopted, is the generated code really safe to deploy in production? To investigate this question, we propose SUSVIBES, a benchmark consisting of 186 feature-request software engineering tasks from real-world open-source projects, for which, human programmers committed vulnerable implementations. We evaluate 12 widely used coding agentic settings with frontier models on the benchmark. Disturbingly, all agents perform poorly in terms of software security. Although 57% of the solutions from SWE-Agent with Claude 4 Sonnet are functionally correct, only 11.8% are secure. Further experiments demonstrate that preliminary security strategies, such as augmenting the feature request with vulnerability hints, cannot mitigate these security issues. Our findings raise serious concerns about the widespread adoption of vibe coding, particularly in security-sensitive applications. The code and dataset are available at https://github.com/LeiLiLab/susvibes. The leaderboard is at https://leililab.github.io/susvibes-leaderboard.

cs.SE

Why3-py: A Tool for Formal Verification of Hypothesis Testing and Meta-Analysis in Python

The reproducibility crisis in scientific research has received widespread recognition, thereby increasing the importance of meta-analyses that integrate statistical analyses from multiple studies. However, statistical methods often have ambiguous and implicit underlying assumptions, which can lead to their erroneous applications and interpretations. To address this issue, we propose a formal verification framework for statistical Python programs. Specifically, we present Why3-py, a Python front-end for the Why3 verification platform that transforms Python code into verification-oriented WhyML representations, addressing the challenges arising from Python's dynamic typing and runtime polymorphism. Furthermore, we extend the StatWhy tool to support the verification of meta-analysis methods. These tools enable meta-analysts to identify overlooked assumptions and misuse of analyses, and to verify the correct use of hypothesis testing and meta-analysis methods in Python code.

cs.SE

What is the Difference Between Me and You? Benchmarking the Quality Gap Between Human-Written and AI-Generated Code

AI coding assistants are becoming co-authors of production software, yet their evaluation centers on functional correctness, leaving open whether their code differs from human code in the quality dimensions dominating lifecycle cost. We compare human-written and AI-generated code at scale: 787,562 function pairs across Python, Java, and C, each human function mined from open-source repositories paired with implementations generated from its docstring by three AI assistants (OpenAI GPT models, DeepSeek-Coder, Qwen2.5-Coder). We characterize structural complexity and statistical naturalness, and map static-analysis findings onto Orthogonal Defect Classification for defects and the Common Weakness Enumeration for vulnerabilities, making authors and languages directly comparable. AI-generated code is structurally compressed and stylistically templated: roughly half the size and branching of human code, clustering apart at the style level. Defect profiles differ in kind: human code concentrates issues of mature codebases, AI code repetitive boilerplate; security is language-dependent, with LLMs producing more, and more severe, findings in Python and Java but fewer high-severity memory-safety findings than humans in C. Once size is controlled for, complexity metrics carry little signal, while naturalness separates authors. Finally, we release CQBench, a benchmark of 27,346 issue-prone tasks with baselines and an evaluation pipeline for quality assurance and security testing.

cs.SE