VolumeProbe Where to Look Matters:
Rethinking Sub-Volume Sampling
in 3D Medical Self-supervised Learning

01 · Overview

Better observations make better representations.

VolumeProbe replaces random cropping with an offline probe bank per volume, improving 3D medical SSL without changing the backbone or training objective.

  • Training-free sampling
  • Plug-and-play
  • Same crop budget
FIGURE 1Teaser
Same crop budget. Better observations.
Read the full abstract

Self-supervised learning on 3D medical images commonly relies on random sub-volume sampling during pretraining. However, random cropping implicitly treats all spatial regions as equally worth observing, despite anatomical priors and spatial redundancy that make regions inherently unequal in their value for representation learning. To this end, we first show through controlled crop-quality manipulations that better sub-volumes lead to better downstream transfer, revealing the observation policy as an overlooked bottleneck in 3D medical SSL. Motivated by this finding, we revisit sub-volume sampling as a where-to-look problem. We propose VolumeProbe, a plug-and-play framework that replaces random cropping with an offline coarse-to-fine probe bank guided by anatomy-awareness, informativeness, and diversity. We instantiate VolumeProbe as a lightweight Lite variant using geometric and image-statistical cues, and a diagnostic Feat variant using frozen visual features, to examine whether lightweight volume-intrinsic priors suffice or richer semantic cues reliably provide additional value. Extensive experiments across multiple 3D medical SSL backbones and downstream tasks demonstrate that VolumeProbe-Lite consistently improves transfer performance over random sampling. Mechanistic analyses further link these gains to more anatomically plausible and informative observations, reduced spatial redundancy, more efficient learning dynamics, and more structured representations.

02 · Motivation

A fixed crop budget. Unequal observations.

Random crops can miss organ-rich structures and revisit redundant regions. Controlled experiments show that better observations lead to better transfer.

FIGURE 2Why crop quality matters
Where should a 3D medical SSL model look?

03 · Method

Better observations, three simple principles.

01

Anatomy-awareness

Favor anatomically plausible regions with spatial priors and boundary suppression.

02

Informativeness

Prioritize structural content using local gradient and intensity-entropy cues.

03

Diversity

Penalize overlapping candidates to preserve coverage and reduce redundancy.

How VolumeProbe Works

01 · Why sampling matters

Same crop budget. Better observations.

Use the same crop budget to sample anatomically plausible, informative, and diverse regions.

Lite and Feat Same pipeline, different scoring cues

VolumeProbe-Lite, the default shown above, uses geometric priors and image statistics: position and boundary distance for anatomy-awareness, and gradient and entropy cues for informativeness. No organ labels or external encoder are required.

VolumeProbe-Feat is a diagnostic variant using a frozen external encoder, prototype similarity (ProtoSim), and feature variance (FeatVar). Both variants share candidate refinement, bank construction, and sampling.

Full framework Figure 3 · Technical details
FIGURE 3VolumeProbe framework
One bank per volume → sample a center → add local jitter → crop → unchanged SSL training.

04 · Results

Consistent transfer gains. Especially with fewer labels.

Low-label segmentation

+4.69 Dice points

WORD · 1% labels

VoCo → VoCo + Lite · 64.24 → 68.93

Matched comparisons improve

45 / 45

Mean performance gains

Lite across three SSL backbones

How the 45 are counted

36 segmentation (3 backbones × 4 datasets × 3 label settings) + 3 classification (3 × 1 dataset) + 6 registration (3 × 2 datasets).

VolumeProbe-Lite improves the mean over each matched random-cropping baseline.

Across downstream tasks

7 datasets · 3 tasks

Segmentation · classification · registration

VoCo · S2DC · MedGMAE

05 · Analysis

Why better observations help.

01

Anatomy-aware sampling in practice

FIGURE 5Representative sampling cases
Random vs. VolumeProbe on BTCV and TotalSegmentator: 3D crop locations, coronal projections, and sampled views.
02

More anatomy in each observation

FIGURE 4Anatomy-awareness
Probe centers better align with organ-rich regions.
03

More useful evidence

FIGURE 6Informativeness
More structural information within the same crop budget.
04

Broader coverage, less repetition

FIGURE 7Coverage & redundancy
Diversity keeps the bank from clustering around a few locations.
05

The principles work together

FIGURE 9Cross-strategy association
Joint observation quality is more closely associated with downstream Dice.
06

Better crops, better representations

FIGURE 8Learning dynamics & representations
More efficient early learning and less redundant, more structure-aligned features.

06 · Citation

BibTeX