MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319300119 · doi:10.1109/wacv56688.2023.00301

MixVPR: Feature Mixing for Visual Place Recognition

2023· article· en· W4319300119 on OpenAlexaff
Amar Ali-bey, Brahim Chaib-draa, Philippe Giguère

Bibliographic record

Venue2023 IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNature
KeywordsComputer scienceFeature (linguistics)Artificial intelligenceMargin (machine learning)Process (computing)CascadePattern recognition (psychology)Latency (audio)Set (abstract data type)Scale (ratio)Feature extractionPrecision and recallComputer visionMachine learningEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Visual Place Recognition (VPR) is a crucial part of mobile robotics and autonomous driving as well as other computer vision tasks. It refers to the process of identifying a place depicted in a query image using only computer vision. At large scale, repetitive structures, weather and illumination changes pose a real challenge, as appearances can drastically change over time. Along with tackling these challenges, an efficient VPR technique must also be practical in real-world scenarios where latency matters. To address this, we introduce MixVPR, a new holistic feature aggregation technique that takes feature maps from pre-trained backbones as a set of global features. Then, it incorporates a global relationship between elements in each feature map in a cascade of feature mixing, eliminating the need for local or pyramidal aggregation as done in NetVLAD or TransVPR. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our technique through extensive experiments on multiple large-scale benchmarks. Our method outperforms all existing techniques by a large margin while having less than half the number of parameters compared to CosPlace and NetVLAD. We achieve a new all-time high recall@1 score of 94.6% on Pitts250k-test, 88.0% on MapillarySLS, and more importantly, 58.4% on Nordland. Finally, our method outperforms two-stage retrieval techniques such as Patch-NetVLAD, TransVPR and SuperGLUE all while being orders of magnitude faster.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.008

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations226
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2023 IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV)Same topicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval TechniquesFrench-language works237,207