DC-YOLOv8: Small Size Object Detection Algorithm Based on Camera Sensor
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
Traditional camera sensors rely on human eyes for observation. However, the human eye 1 is prone to fatigue when observing targets of different sizes for a long time in complex scenes, and 2 human cognition is limited, which often leads to judgment errors and greatly reduces the efficiency. 3 Target recognition technology is an important technology to judge the target category in camera 4 sensor. In order to solve this problem, a small size target detection algorithm for special scenarios was 5 proposed by this paper. Its advantage is that this algorithm not only has higher precision for small 6 size target detection, but also can ensure that the detection accuracy of each size is not lower than the 7 existing algorithm. In this paper, a new down-sampling method was proposed, which could better 8 preserve the context feature information. The feature fusion network was improved to effectively 9 combine shallow information and deep information. A new network structure was proposed to 10 effectively improve the detection accuracy of the model. In terms of accuracy, it is better than: YOLOX, 11 YOLOXR, YOLOv3, scaled YOLOv5, YOLOv7-Tiny and YOLOv8.Three authoritative public data sets 12 were used in this experiment: a) On Visdron data sets (small size targets), DC-YOLOv8 is 2.5% more 13 accurate than YOLOv8. b) On Tinyperson data sets (minimal size targets), DC-YOLOv8 is 1% more 14 accurate than YOLOv8. c) On PASCAL VOC2007 data sets (Normal size target), DC-YOLOv8 is 0.5% 15 more accurate than YOLOv8.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.005 |
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