MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2956648669 · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2019.00325

Box-Driven Class-Wise Region Masking and Filling Rate Guided Loss for Weakly Supervised Semantic Segmentation

2019· article· en· W2956648669 on OpenAlexaff
Chunfeng Song, Yan Huang, Wanli Ouyang, Liang Wang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Neural Network Applications
Canadian institutionsCentre Casa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMinimum bounding boxPascal (unit)Computer scienceBounding overwatchSegmentationBenchmark (surveying)Artificial intelligencePixelClass (philosophy)Masking (illustration)Pattern recognition (psychology)Machine learningImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Semantic segmentation has achieved huge progress via adopting deep Fully Convolutional Networks (FCN). However, the performance of FCN based models severely rely on the amounts of pixel-level annotations which are expensive and time-consuming. To address this problem, it is a good choice to learn to segment with weak supervision from bounding boxes. How to make full use of the class-level and region-level supervisions from bounding boxes is the critical challenge for the weakly supervised learning task. In this paper, we first introduce a box-driven class-wise masking model (BCM) to remove irrelevant regions of each class. Moreover, based on the pixel-level segment proposal generated from the bounding box supervision, we could calculate the mean filling rates of each class to serve as an important prior cue, then we propose a filling rate guided adaptive loss (FR-Loss) to help the model ignore the wrongly labeled pixels in proposals. Unlike previous methods directly training models with the fixed individual segment proposals, our method can adjust the model learning with global statistical information. Thus it can help reduce the negative impacts from wrongly labeled proposals. We evaluate the proposed method on the challenging PASCAL VOC 2012 benchmark and compare with other methods. Extensive experimental results show that the proposed method is effective and achieves the state-of-the-art results.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.249 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations261
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Neural Network ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207