MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Dilated Strip-Wise Spatial Feature Pyramid: An Efficient Network for Object Detection

2025· article· en· W4413557520 on OpenAlexafffund
Harish Sundaralingam, Thangarajah Akilan, Saad Bin Ahmed

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPyramid (geometry)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceObject detectionFeature (linguistics)Computer visionObject (grammar)Pattern recognition (psychology)Feature extractionMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Object detection has become a fundamental capability in modern computer vision, enabling critical applications from autonomous systems to aerial surveillance. Unmanned aerial vehicle object detection (UAV-OD) presents unique challenges, including small object sizes, occlusions, and complex back-grounds. While most existing approaches rely on standard feature pyramid networks (FPN) to combine multi-level features, these methods often fail to capture long-range contextual relationships and directional patterns essential for small object detection. To address these limitations, we propose dilated strip-wise spatial feature pyramid (DSSFP), a novel architecture that explicitly focuses on long-range dependencies through dilated strip-wise convolutions (Conv), directional features via spatial-aware attention mechanisms, and multi-scale context while preserving spatial resolution. On the VisDrone dataset, our method improves average precision (AP) by +22.3% and AP50 by +26.1% compared to the baseline. Our method establishes new state-of-the-art results on the AI-TOD benchmark (27.8% AP/59.9% AP50), improving the prior work by +3.3%. The consistent gains across small, medium, and large objects demonstrate the framework's robustness for UAV applications. Source code is available at: https://github.com/harish1120/HR-DSSFP

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.971
Threshold uncertainty score0.534

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval TechniquesFrench-language works237,207