Cited by 88Advanced Neural Network ApplicationsAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval TechniquesVisual Attention and Saliency Detection

End-to-end integration of a Convolutional Network, Deformable Parts Model and non-maximum suppression

Open access
Li Wan, Eigen, David, Fergus, Rob·2015·2015 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)

Abstract

Deformable Parts Models and Convolutional Networks each have achieved notable performance in object detection. Yet these two approaches find their strengths in complementary areas: DPMs are well-versed in object composition, modeling fine-grained spatial relationships between parts; likewise, ConvNets are adept at producing powerful image features, having been discriminatively trained directly on the pixels. In this paper, we propose a new model that combines these two approaches, obtaining the advantages of each. We train this model using a new structured loss function that considers all bounding boxes within an image, rather than isolated object instances. This enables the non-maximal suppression (NMS) operation, previously treated as a separate post-processing stage, to be integrated into the model. This allows for discriminative training of our combined Convnet + DPM + NMS model in end-to-end fashion. We evaluate our system on PASCAL VOC 2007 and 2011 datasets, achieving competitive results on both benchmarks.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/cvpr.2015.7298686

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Learning based NMS is a recent group of NMS improvements.

    “A recent group of NMS improvements that have recently received much attention is learning based NMS [85, 93, 109-111, 122].”

    From Object Detection in 20 Years: A Survey (2023) · cites this paper as [122]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 22 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wan, L., Eigen, D., & Fergus, R.
Affiliations
New York University (US)
Venue
2015 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2015-06
Pages
851-859
ISSN
1063-6919 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1931778309
Cited by
86
References
22
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 1
FWCI
7.11
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Visual Attention and Saliency Detection
Keywords
object detection, deformable part models, convolutional neural networks, non-maximum suppression, end-to-end learning, bounding box regression, Pascal VOC

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review