MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377241880 · doi:10.3390/electronics12102323

DC-YOLOv8: Small-Size Object Detection Algorithm Based on Camera Sensor

2023· article· en· W4377241880 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

VenueElectronics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Neural Network Applications
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceObject detectionUpsamplingObject (grammar)Precision and recallFeature (linguistics)Context (archaeology)Point (geometry)Computer visionPattern recognition (psychology)AlgorithmImage (mathematics)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditional camera sensors rely on human eyes for observation. However, human eyes are prone to fatigue when observing objects of different sizes for a long time in complex scenes, and human cognition is limited, which often leads to judgment errors and greatly reduces efficiency. Object recognition technology is an important technology used to judge the object’s category on a camera sensor. In order to solve this problem, a small-size object detection algorithm for special scenarios was proposed in this paper. The advantage of this algorithm is that it not only has higher precision for small-size object detection but also can ensure that the detection accuracy for each size is not lower than that of the existing algorithm. There are three main innovations in this paper, as follows: (1) A new downsampling method which could better preserve the context feature information is proposed. (2) The feature fusion network is improved to effectively combine shallow information and deep information. (3) A new network structure is proposed to effectively improve the detection accuracy of the model. From the point of view of detection accuracy, it is better than YOLOX, YOLOR, YOLOv3, scaled YOLOv5, YOLOv7-Tiny, and YOLOv8. Three authoritative public datasets are used in these experiments: (a) In the Visdron dataset (small-size objects), the map, precision, and recall ratios of DC-YOLOv8 are 2.5%, 1.9%, and 2.1% higher than those of YOLOv8s, respectively. (b) On the Tinyperson dataset (minimal-size objects), the map, precision, and recall ratios of DC-YOLOv8 are 1%, 0.2%, and 1.2% higher than those of YOLOv8s, respectively. (c) On the PASCAL VOC2007 dataset (normal-size objects), the map, precision, and recall ratios of DC-YOLOv8 are 0.5%, 0.3%, and 0.4% higher than those of YOLOv8s, respectively.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.934
Threshold uncertainty score0.762

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.248
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