ArticleScientific reports2026
Adversarial vulnerability and robustness of deep learning models for panoramic dental X-ray segmentation.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Deep learning-based segmentation has become essential in computer-aided dental diagnosis and treatment planning. However, these models remain highly vulnerable to adversarial perturbations, like small and imperceptible changes in input images, which can drastically alter segmentation outputs and compromise clinical reliability. In this work, we present the first systematic study on adversarial vulnerability and robustness of deep learning models for panoramic dental X-ray segmentation. We curated a dataset of 995 panoramic images by combining 361 expert-annotated radiographs with 634 refined masks from the DENTEX 2023 challenge. Under identical training conditions, initially, we benchmarked 11 unique model variants, including five core architectures (Attention UNet, SegNet, Trans UNet, Vanilla UNet, and UNet++) and their corresponding ablations on training and preprocessing techniques. UNet++ emerged as the most practical backbone (clean IoU [Formula: see text], Dice [Formula: see text]) and subjected to a suite of white-box attacks with FGSM, I-FGSM, PGD, and DeepFool across perturbation ([Formula: see text]). Our results reveal that even minimal perturbations caused large performance drops, such as at [Formula: see text], IoU collapsed to 23.5% (0.851 to 0.649). To mitigate this fragility, we implemented a customized multi-attack adversarial defense strategy to ensure the model's robustness, which preserved a modest clean-accuracy trade-off by increasing 14.9% (IoU 0.649 to 0.798) at [Formula: see text] and 12.5% at [Formula: see text]. Our qualitative and quantitative analyses demonstrate that the defended model produces more stable and anatomically consistent masks under attack and set the benchmark of adversarial robustness in dental image segmentation as an effective defense strategy for safety-critical clinical deployment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.