MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4295990984 · doi:10.1080/07038992.2022.2118109

Ship Detection in SAR Images via Cross-Attention Mechanism

2022· article· en· W4295990984 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yilong Lv, Min Li

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Remote Sensing · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Neural Network Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceSynthetic aperture radarFeature (linguistics)Backbone networkObject detectionNoise (video)Pattern recognition (psychology)Convolutional neural networkBenchmark (surveying)WeightingComputer visionObject (grammar)Image (mathematics)GeographyTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep learning has been widely applied to ship detection in Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) images. Unlike optical images, the current object detection methods have the problem of weak feature representation due to the low object resolution in SAR images. In addition, disturbed by chaotic noise, the features of classification and location are prone to significant differences, resulting in classification and location task misalignment. Therefore, this paper proposes a novel SAR ship target detection algorithm based on Cross-Attention Mechanism (CAM), which can establish the information interaction between the classification and localization task and strengthen the correlation between features through attention. In addition, to suppress the noise in multi-scale feature fusion, we designed an Attention-based Feature Fusion Module (AFFM), which uses the attention information between channels to perform the re-weighting operation. This operation can enhance useful feature information and suppress noise information. Experimental results show that on a benchmark SAR Ship Detection Dataset (SSDD), the Fully Convolutional One-Stage Object Detector (FCOS) with ResNet-50 backbone network was optimized to improve AP by 6.5% and computational cost by 0.51%. RetinaNet with ResNet-50 backbone network was optimized to improve AP by 1.8% and computational cost by 0.51%.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.968
Threshold uncertainty score0.427

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Remote SensingSame topicAdvanced Neural Network ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207