Sharing Visual Features for Multiclass and Multiview Object Detection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider the problem of detecting a large number of different classes of objects in cluttered scenes. Traditional approaches require applying a battery of different classifiers to the image, at multiple locations and scales. This can be slow and can require a lot of training data since each classifier requires the computation of many different image features. In particular, for independently trained detectors, the (runtime) computational complexity and the (training-time) sample complexity scale linearly with the number of classes to be detected. We present a multitask learning procedure, based on boosted decision stumps, that reduces the computational and sample complexity by finding common features that can be shared across the classes (and/or views). The detectors for each class are trained jointly, rather than independently. For a given performance level, the total number of features required and, therefore, the runtime cost of the classifier, is observed to scale approximately logarithmically with the number of classes. The features selected by joint training are generic edge-like features, whereas the features chosen by training each class separately tend to be more object-specific. The generic features generalize better and considerably reduce the computational cost of multiclass object detection.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".