MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

ifUNet++: Iterative Feedback UNet++ for Infrared Small Target Detection

2023· article· en· W4372259885 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrared Target Detection Methodologies
Canadian institutionsNovelis (Canada)
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsClutterRobustness (evolution)Computer scienceIterative methodInfraredInterference (communication)Noise (video)Artificial intelligenceAlgorithmComputer visionRadarTelecommunicationsImage (mathematics)OpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Small targets are often submerged in the cluttered backgrounds of infrared images. In this paper, we propose an iterative feedback UNet++ for infrared small target detection, dubbed ifUNet++. Unlike most of existing methods, ifU-Net++ enables to concentrate on small targets while weakening the interference of clutter backgrounds. ifUNet++ contains two parts: a simplified UNet++ and an iterative feedback strategy. We reduce the unnecessary nodes of UNet++ and have the simplified UNet++ as our backbone network, avoiding the loss of infrared small targets. Based on the simplified network, we search the infrared small targets in an iterative feedback manner, avoiding the interference of cluttered backgrounds. Besides, to optimize the iterative results, we propose Contextual Multiple Attention (CMA) to enhance the features in each iteration. Experimental results exhibit the clear promotion of ifUNet++ over eight state-of-the-art methods, in terms of noise-robustness and detection accuracy.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.228
Threshold uncertainty score0.896

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInfrared Target Detection MethodologiesFrench-language works237,207