MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401806323 · doi:10.1109/tcsvt.2024.3449070

F2CENet: Single-Image Object Counting Based on Block Co-Saliency Density Map Estimation

2024· article· en· W4401806323 on OpenAlexaff
Xuehui Wu, Huanliang Xu, Henry Leung, Xiaobo Lu, Yanbin Li

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVisual Attention and Saliency Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceBlock (permutation group theory)Computer visionComputer scienceImage (mathematics)Pattern recognition (psychology)Object (grammar)Object detectionMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a novel single-image object counting method based on block co-saliency density map estimation, called free-to-count everything network (F2CENet). Image block co-saliency attention is introduced to promote density estimation adaptation, allowing to input any image with arbitrary size for accurate counting using the learned model without requiring manually labeled few shots. The proposed network also outperforms existing crowd counting methods based on geometry-adaptive kernels in complex scenes. A novel module generates multilevel & scale block correlation maps to guide the co-saliency density map estimation. Co-saliency attention maps are then fused for accurately locating block-wise salient objects under guidance of the initial cues. Hence, accurate density maps are generated via comprehensive learning of internal relations in block co-salient features and progressive optimization of local details with saliency-oriented scene understanding. Results from extensive experiments on existing density map estimation datasets with arbitrary challenges verify the effectiveness of the proposed F2CENet and show that it outperforms various state-of-the-art few-shot and crowd counting methods. Mean Absolute Error (MAE) and Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) are used as evaluation metrics to measure the accuracy which are commonly used metrics for counting task. The average predicted MAE and RMSE are 10.88% and 8.44% less compared with the state-of-the-art evaluated on dataset contains sufficiently large and diverse categories used for few-shot and crowd counting.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.974
Threshold uncertainty score0.902

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video TechnologySame topicVisual Attention and Saliency DetectionFrench-language works237,207