MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

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

2023· article· en· W4372259885 on OpenAlexaff
Zhangying Weng, Li Peng, Xin Zhuang, Xuefeng Yan, Lina Gong, Haoran Xie, Mingqiang Wei

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.

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)0.003
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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

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
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInfrared Target Detection MethodologiesFrench-language works237,207