MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393154725 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v38i4.28069

FRED: Towards a Full Rotation-Equivariance in Aerial Image Object Detection

2024· article· en· W4393154725 on OpenAlexaff
Chan-Ho Lee, Jinsu Son, Hyounguk Shon, Yunho Jeon, Junmo Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
FundersKorea Health Industry Development Institute
KeywordsComputer visionRotation (mathematics)Artificial intelligenceAerial imageImage (mathematics)Object (grammar)Computer scienceObject detectionComputer graphics (images)Pattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rotation-equivariance is an essential yet challenging property in oriented object detection. While general object detectors naturally leverage robustness to spatial shifts due to the translation-equivariance of the conventional CNNs, achieving rotation-equivariance remains an elusive goal. Current detectors deploy various alignment techniques to derive rotation-invariant features, but still rely on high capacity models and heavy data augmentation with all possible rotations. In this paper, we introduce a Fully Rotation-Equivariant Oriented Object Detector (FRED), whose entire process from the image to the bounding box prediction is strictly equivariant. Specifically, we decouple the invariant task (object classification) and the equivariant task (object localization) to achieve end-to-end equivariance. We represent the bounding box as a set of rotation-equivariant vectors to implement rotation-equivariant localization. Moreover, we utilized these rotation-equivariant vectors as offsets in the deformable convolution, thereby enhancing the existing advantages of spatial adaptation. Leveraging full rotation-equivariance, our FRED demonstrates higher robustness to image-level rotation compared to existing methods. Furthermore, we show that FRED is one step closer to non-axis aligned learning through our experiments. Compared to state-of-the-art methods, our proposed method delivers comparable performance on DOTA-v1.0 and outperforms by 1.5 mAP on DOTA-v1.5, all while significantly reducing the model parameters to 16%.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations17
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval TechniquesFrench-language works237,207