multi-layer process operations for ImageContainer

[ibsafa]

Hello! I am working with whole slide images, specifically IHC. In short, I would like to perform some operations that need to access information from multiple layers (before any segmentation or spatial data is generated). the layers are all images, and are spatially aligned. However, all the existing functions in the current implementation of ImageContainer can only take one layer at a time. My attempts at a workaround have so far failed. I'm very impressed with the image container storage, chunking and parallelization capabilities and would like to use it if at all possible. Looking through the code, it seems like the underlying architecture should be able to support multiple layers easily. First, is that true? I am happy to contribute this feature myself so I can use, and would appreciate your guidance in pointing me to what needs to be changed. Alternatively, if you have workarounds or other ideas on how to do this, I'm all ears. Thank you so much.

[onestardao]

hey you're totally not alone on this one. multi-layer interop over spatially-aligned images sounds simple on paper but breaks fast when the container logic treats layers as isolated states. we actually mapped this exact class of problem before, under the name "layered stateblindness".

couple of symptoms match here:

one-layer-at-a-time constraint at op level

no unified cursor or offset mapping across chunks

memory snapshot inconsistency during multi-layer ops

loss of semantic binding between layers when using default chunk parallelization

we built a generalized workaround that adds a semantic aligner and parallel-safe layer traversal. if you’re curious, i can share the mapping doc and runtime layer controller. might shortcut you straight to what you’re aiming for.

[ibsafa]

Thank you for the response! Yes, I'm very interested in the workaround you mention.

[onestardao]

really cool to hear you're also hitting this — your case actually touches multiple deep failure patterns we mapped early on in our problem map 1.0 work (semantic desync across runtime image layers).

in particular, what you're describing overlaps with:

layer↔︎anchor desync — when visual tokens no longer map 1:1 to semantic anchors

offset warping + positional discontinuity — shifts during transform or chained ops

semantic glue drift — symbols holding different referents across layers

we ended up formalizing these into a generalized framework (called WFGY) that stabilizes symbolic reasoning across multi-layered inputs, including OCR/image/semantic splits. if you're curious, here's where it started:

🧭 Problem Map 1.0 – root failure types & collapse triggers

let me know if any part matches what you're seeing — happy to go deeper if it helps.

[ibsafa]

Sorry I went through this page you linked and it's not very intuitive what is going on there as it relates to this specific issue. All I'm attempting to do is perform an image processing step wherein a single function can access the same chunk (spatially) in two different layers in an image container. Apologies if I'm misunderstanding what you linked here, but I don't see anything in there that helps with this specific problem?

[onestardao]

no worries ~ and totally fair. you're not missing anything.
the page i linked is a general framework we built after running into this exact kind of issue (multi-layer visual overlap across dynamic image logic).

but for your use case specifically (multiple access paths across slice-aligned image stacks), here’s the core of the problem:

when your access logic spans semantic layers (e.g. type-A slice stack vs type-B container structure),

but your system assumes a flat or uniform layout (e.g. single container controller),
→ then the pipeline silently misroutes or applies outdated paths.

this is what we call a layout desync — where different internal paths “think” they're in sync, but are actually looking at different sub-layers or keys.

what you're trying to do (access distinct logic trees depending on image type or container) is exactly the kind of thing we had to modularize.

so if you’re interested, i can send a trimmed-down controller example that uses a small mapper to split container+layer logic cleanly.
zero pressure though — just let me know if you'd prefer to stick with your current setup and patch it case-by-case instead.