Dynamic Label Assignment for Object Detection by Combining Predicted IoUs and Anchor IoUs
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
Label assignment plays a significant role in modern object detection models. Detection models may yield totally different performances with different label assignment strategies. For anchor-based detection models, the IoU (Intersection over Union) threshold between the anchors and their corresponding ground truth bounding boxes is the key element since the positive samples and negative samples are divided by the IoU threshold. Early object detectors simply utilize the fixed threshold for all training samples, while recent detection algorithms focus on adaptive thresholds based on the distribution of the IoUs to the ground truth boxes. In this paper, we introduce a simple while effective approach to perform label assignment dynamically based on the training status with predictions. By introducing the predictions in label assignment, more high-quality samples with higher IoUs to the ground truth objects are selected as the positive samples, which could reduce the discrepancy between the classification scores and the IoU scores, and generate more high-quality boundary boxes. Our approach shows improvements in the performance of the detection models with the adaptive label assignment algorithm and lower bounding box losses for those positive samples, indicating more samples with higher-quality predicted boxes are selected as positives.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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