Cited by 1,005Advanced Neural Network ApplicationsDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot LearningAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques

Unsupervised Learning of Visual Representations Using Videos

Open access
Wang, Xiaolong, Gupta, Abhinav·2015·2015 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV)

Abstract

Is strong supervision necessary for learning a good visual representation? Do we really need millions of semantically-labeled images to train a Convolutional Neural Network (CNN)? In this paper, we present a simple yet surprisingly powerful approach for unsupervised learning of CNN. Specifically, we use hundreds of thousands of unlabeled videos from the web to learn visual representations. Our key idea is that visual tracking provides the supervision. That is, two patches connected by a track should have similar visual representation in deep feature space since they probably belong to same object or object part. We design a Siamese-triplet network with a ranking loss function to train this CNN representation. Without using a single image from ImageNet, just using 100K unlabeled videos and the VOC 2012 dataset, we train an ensemble of unsupervised networks that achieves 52% mAP (no bounding box regression). This performance comes tantalizingly close to its ImageNet-supervised counterpart, an ensemble which achieves a mAP of 54.4%. We also show that our unsupervised network can perform competitively in other tasks such as surface-normal estimation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/iccv.2015.320

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

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?

  • Most deepfake detection methods assume a static game.

    “Our survey found that most deepfake detection methods assume a static game (Mirsky and Lee 2021; Wang and Gupta 2015).”

    From Deepfake video detection: challenges and opportunities (2024) · cites this paper as Wang and Gupta 2015

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 58 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wang, X., & Gupta, A.
Affiliations
Carnegie Mellon University (US)
Venue
2015 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2015-12
Pages
2794-2802
OpenAlex
W219040644
Cited by
1,005
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 44 · 2023: 63 · 2022: 97 · 2021: 146 · 2020: 173 · 2019: 140 · 2018: 121 · 2017: 108 · 2016: 65 · 2015: 8
FWCI
41.29
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (1320083)
  • Nvidia
  • Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (FA8750-14- 2-0244, FA8750)
  • Multidisciplinary University Research Initiative
  • Office of Naval Research (N00014-10-10934, MURI N000141010934)
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
video-based learning, visual object tracking, ranking loss, object detection, unlabeled video, surface normal estimation, 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