Cited by 2,629Advanced Neural Network ApplicationsDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot LearningAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques

Unsupervised Visual Representation Learning by Context Prediction

Doersch, Carl, Gupta, Abhinav, Efros, Alexei A.·2015·2015 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV)

Abstract

This work explores the use of spatial context as a source of free and plentiful supervisory signal for training a rich visual representation. Given only a large, unlabeled image collection, we extract random pairs of patches from each image and train a convolutional neural net to predict the position of the second patch relative to the first. We argue that doing well on this task requires the model to learn to recognize objects and their parts. We demonstrate that the feature representation learned using this within-image context indeed captures visual similarity across images. For example, this representation allows us to perform unsupervised visual discovery of objects like cats, people, and even birds from the Pascal VOC 2011 detection dataset. Furthermore, we show that the learned ConvNet can be used in the R-CNN framework [19] and provides a significant boost over a randomly-initialized ConvNet, resulting in state-of-the-art performance among algorithms which use only Pascal-provided training set annotations.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/iccv.2015.167

Cites

57 of 57 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?

  • Doersch et al. proposed using SSL to predict a missing patch by selecting a random patch and predicting the relative position of an image's second and central patches.

    “Doersch et al. [18] proposed using SSL to predict a missing patch. They chose a random patch and predicted the relative position of an image's second and central patches, as shown in Fig. 9b.”

    From Self-supervised learning: A succinct review (2023) · cites this paper as [18]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Doersch, C., Gupta, A., & Efros, A. A.
Affiliations
  • Carnegie Mellon University (US)
  • University of California, Berkeley (US)
Venue
2015 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2015-12
Pages
1422-1430
OpenAlex
W343636949
Cited by
2,629
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 58 · 2025: 157 · 2024: 276 · 2023: 381 · 2022: 453 · 2021: 561 · 2020: 361 · 2019: 191 · 2018: 90 · 2017: 54 · 2016: 45 · 2015: 2
FWCI
26.11
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Keywords
spatial context, object recognition, visual similarity, unsupervised object discovery, R-CNN, 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