Knowledge Distillation for Low-Power Object Detection: A Simple Technique and Its Extensions for Training Compact Models Using Unlabeled Data
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
The existing solutions for object detection distillation rely on the availability of both a teacher model and ground-truth labels. We propose a new perspective to relax this constraint. In our framework, a student is first trained with pseudo labels generated by the teacher, and then fine-tuned using labeled data, if any available. Extensive experiments demonstrate improvements over existing object detection distillation algorithms. In addition, decoupling the teacher and ground-truth distillation in this framework provides interesting properties such as: 1) using unlabeled data to further improve the student’s performance, 2) combining multiple teacher models of different architectures, even with different object categories, and 3) reducing the need for labeled data (with only 20% of COCO labels, this method achieves the same performance as the model trained on the entire set of labels). Furthermore, a by-product of this approach is the potential usage for domain adaptation. We verify these properties through extensive experiments.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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