Cited by 913Advanced Neural Network ApplicationsAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval TechniquesVisual Attention and Saliency Detection

An Analysis of Scale Invariance in Object Detection - SNIP

Singh, Bharat, Davis, Larry S.·2018·2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition

Abstract

An analysis of different techniques for recognizing and detecting objects under extreme scale variation is presented. Scale specific and scale invariant design of detectors are compared by training them with different configurations of input data. By evaluating the performance of different network architectures for classifying small objects on ImageNet, we show that CNNs are not robust to changes in scale. Based on this analysis, we propose to train and test detectors on the same scales of an image-pyramid. Since small and large objects are difficult to recognize at smaller and larger scales respectively, we present a novel training scheme called Scale Normalization for Image Pyramids (SNIP) which selectively back-propagates the gradients of object instances of different sizes as a function of the image scale. On the COCO dataset, our single model performance is 45.7% and an ensemble of 3 networks obtains an mAP of 48.3%. We use off-the-shelf ImageNet-1000 pre-trained models and only train with bounding box supervision. Our submission won the Best Student Entry in the COCO 2017 challenge. Code will be made available at http://bit.ly/2yXVg4c.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/cvpr.2018.00377

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • Visual elements can vary substantially in scale, unlike word tokens in language Transformers.

    “Unlike the word tokens that serve as the basic elements of processing in language Transformers, visual elements can vary substantially in scale, a problem that receives attention in tasks such as object detection [42, 53, 54].”
  • SNIP builds image pyramids at both training and detection stages and only backpropagates the loss of some selected scales.

    “A recent improvement is Scale Normalization for Image Pyramids (SNIP) [176], which builds image pyramids at both training and detection stages and only backpropagates the loss of some selected scales, as shown in Fig. 12.”

    From Object Detection in 20 Years: A Survey (2023) · cites this paper as [176]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Singh, B., & Davis, L. S.
Affiliations
University of Maryland, College Park (US)
Venue
2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2018-06
Pages
3578-3587
ISSN
1063-6919 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2768489488
Cited by
913
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 43 · 2025: 77 · 2024: 83 · 2023: 130 · 2022: 140 · 2021: 173 · 2020: 134 · 2019: 119 · 2018: 14
FWCI
33.16
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)
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
scale invariance, object detection, image pyramid, small object recognition, convolutional neural networks

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