Cited by 175Advanced Neural Network ApplicationsAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval TechniquesDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning

RIFD-CNN: Rotation-Invariant and Fisher Discriminative Convolutional Neural Networks for Object Detection

Cheng, Gong, Zhou, Peicheng, Han, Junwei·2016·2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)

Abstract

Thanks to the powerful feature representations obtained through deep convolutional neural network (CNN), the performance of object detection has recently been substantially boosted. Despite the remarkable success, the problems of object rotation, within-class variability, and between-class similarity remain several major challenges. To address these problems, this paper proposes a novel and effective method to learn a rotation-invariant and Fisher discriminative CNN (RIFD-CNN) model. This is achieved by introducing and learning a rotation-invariant layer and a Fisher discriminative layer, respectively, on the basis of the existing high-capacity CNN architectures. Specifically, the rotation-invariant layer is trained by imposing an explicit regularization constraint on the objective function that enforces invariance on the CNN features before and after rotating. The Fisher discriminative layer is trained by imposing the Fisher discrimination criterion on the CNN features so that they have small within-class scatter but large between-class separation. In the experiments, we comprehensively evaluate the proposed method for object detection task on a public available aerial image dataset and the PASCAL VOC 2007 dataset. State-of-the-art results are achieved compared with the existing baseline methods.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/cvpr.2016.315

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • Designing rotation invariant loss functions is a recent popular solution, where a constraint on the detection loss is added so that the feature of rotated objects keeps unchanged.

    “Designing rotation invariant loss functions is a recent popular solution, where a constraint on the detection loss is added so that the feature of rotated objects keeps unchanged [169-171].”

    From Object Detection in 20 Years: A Survey (2023) · cites this paper as [169]

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 60 · Cited by 175

Authors
Cheng, G., Zhou, P., & Han, J.
Affiliations
Northwestern Polytechnical University (CN)
Venue
2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2016-06
Pages
2884-2893
ISSN
1063-6919 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2461725797
Cited by
175
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 31 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 19
FWCI
8.10
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Natural Science Foundation of China
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 › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
Keywords
object detection, rotation invariance, feature regularization, aerial images, Pascal VOC 2007

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