Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we propose a fast deep learning method for object saliency detection using convolutional neural networks. In our approach, we use a gradient descent method to iteratively modify the input images based on the pixel-wise gradients to reduce a pre-defined cost function, which is defined to measure the class-specific objectness and clamp the class-irrelevant outputs to maintain image background. The pixel-wise gradients can be efficiently computed using the back-propagation algorithm. We further apply SLIC superpixels and LAB color based low level saliency features to smooth and refine the gradients. Our methods are quite computationally efficient, much faster than other deep learning based saliency methods. Experimental results on two benchmark tasks, namely Pascal VOC 2012 and MSRA10k, have shown that our proposed methods can generate high-quality salience maps, at least comparable with many slow and complicated deep learning methods. Comparing with the pure low-level methods, our approach excels in handling many difficult images, which contain complex background, highly-variable salient objects, multiple objects, and/or very small salient objects.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".