Model overview
SAM3-LiteText was proposed in SAM3-LiteText: An Anatomical Study of the SAM3 Text Encoder for Efficient Vision-Language Segmentation by Chengxi Zeng, Yuxuan Jiang, Ge Gao, Shuai Wang, Duolikun Danier, Bin Zhu, Stevan Rudinac, David Bull, and Fan Zhang. SAM3-LiteText is a lightweight variant of SAM3 that replaces the heavy SAM3 text encoder (353M parameters) with a compact MobileCLIP-based text encoder optimized through knowledge distillation. The SAM3 ViT-H image encoder is kept intact. This reduces text encoder parameters by up to 88% while maintaining segmentation performance comparable to the original model. *Vision-language segmentation models such as SAM3 enable flexible, prompt-driven visual grounding, but inherit large, general-purpose text encoders originally designed for open-ended language understanding. In practice, segmentation prompts are short, structured, and semantically constrained, leading to substantial over-provisioning in text encoder capacity and persistent computational and memory overhead. In this paper, we perform a large-scale anatomical analysis of text prompting in vision-language segmentation, covering 404,796 real prompts across multiple benchmarks. Our analysis reveals severe redundancy: most context windows are underutilized, vocabulary usage is highly sparse, and text embeddings lie on low-dimensional manifold despite high-dimensional representations. Motivated by these findings, we propose SAM3-LiteText, a lightweight text encoding framework that replaces the original SAM3 text encoder with a compact MobileCLIP student that is optimized by knowledge distillation. Extensive experiments on image and video segmentation benchmarks show that SAM3-LiteText reduces text encoder parameters by up to 88%, substantially reducing static memory footprint, while maintaining segmentation performance comparable to the original model.*
Key features
特点摘要待依据来源补齐，不凭模型名称推断能力。
Limitations & considerations
Sources are insufficient to establish specific limitations. Verify task performance, latency, data policies, licensing and version lifecycle.
Source prices & cost analysis
Prices vary by channel, region and configuration. Channel quotes are listed independently and are not treated as a single official provider price.
| Source / channel | Input | Output | Billing unit | Collected at |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| No verified prices yet. Check the source channel. | ||||
Estimate monthly base token costs
Estimates exclude cache discounts, tiered pricing, multimodal surcharges, web search, taxes and additional reasoning output.
Public benchmarks & run configuration
暂无已采集的可核验公开评分。模型未上榜不代表能力较低。
View full indexed rankings →Frequently asked questions
Do open weights permit free commercial use?
Not necessarily. Check the version license, commercial conditions and usage policies. Self-hosting incurs compute and maintenance costs.
Are these real-time billing prices?
These are timestamped source snapshots, not live billing prices. Check the channel for current versions, regions, discounts and billing methods.
Sources & traceability
许可证：apache-2.0。模型介绍与第三方评测均以原来源的具体版本和方法为准。