Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Complex backgrounds and similar appearances between objects and their surroundings are generally recognized as challenging scenarios in Salient Object Detection (SOD). This naturally leads to the incorporation of depth information in addition to the conventional RGB image as input, known as RGB-D SOD or depth-aware SOD. Meanwhile, this emerging line of research has been considerably hindered by the noise and ambiguity that prevail in raw depth images. To address the aforementioned issues, we propose a Depth Calibration and Fusion (DCF) framework that contains two novel components: 1) a learning strategy to calibrate the latent bias in the original depth maps towards boosting the SOD performance; 2) a simple yet effective cross reference module to fuse features from both RGB and depth modalities. Extensive empirical experiments demonstrate that the proposed approach achieves superior performance against 27 state-of-the-art methods. Moreover, our depth calibration strategy alone can work as a preprocessing step; empirically it results in noticeable improvements when being applied to existing cutting-edge RGB-D SOD models. Source code is available at https://github.com/jiwei0921/DCF.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it