# Segmentation of Knee Bones for Osteoarthritis Assessment: A Comparative Analysis of Supervised, Few-Shot, and Zero-Shot Learning Approaches

Source: [Segmentation of Knee Bones for Osteoarthritis Assessment: A Comparative Analysis of Supervised, Few-Shot, and Zero-Shot Learning Approaches](<https://www.sota2.com/research/paper/68fa72841e209131cea56f49>)

Collection index: [llms.txt](<https://www.sota2.com/research/llms.txt>)

Data updated: 2025-10-27T06:31:06.558Z

Authors: Yun Xin Teoh, Alice Othmani, Siew Li Goh, Juliana Usman, Khin Wee Lai

Published: 2024-03-13T17:58:34.000Z

## Abstract

Knee osteoarthritis is a degenerative joint disease that induces chronic pain and disability. Bone morphological analysis is a promising tool to understand the mechanical aspect of this disorder. This study proposes a 2D bone morphological analysis using manually segmented bones to explore morphological features related to distinct pain conditions. Furthermore, six semantic segmentation algorithms are assessed for extracting femur and tibia bones from X-ray images. Our analysis reveals that the morphology of the femur undergoes significant changes in instances where pain worsens. Conversely, improvements in pain may not manifest pronounced alterations in bone shape. The few-shot-learning-based algorithm, UniverSeg, demonstrated superior segmentation results with Dice scores of 99.69% for femur and 99.60% for tibia. Regarding pain condition classification, the zero-shot-learning-based algorithm, CP-SAM, achieved the highest accuracy at 66% among all models. UniverSeg is recommended for automatic knee bone segmentation, while SAM models show potential with prompt encoder modifications for optimized outcomes. These findings highlight the effectiveness of few-shot learning for semantic segmentation and the potential of zero-shot learning in enhancing classification models for knee osteoarthritis diagnosis.

## Recorded benchmark results

A research result applies to its stated dataset, split, metric and evaluation configuration. Compare like-for-like settings, preserve the metric's unit and direction, and distinguish paper-reported results from independent reproduction. The best result recorded here is not a claim of exhaustive, current global coverage.

## Original sources and implementation

[Original paper](<https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.08761>)

[PDF](<https://arxiv.org/pdf/2403.08761.pdf>)
