Cited by 4,636Advanced Neural Network ApplicationsDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot LearningAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques

Inception-v4, Inception-ResNet and the Impact of Residual Connections on Learning

Open access
Szegedy, Christian, Ioffe, Sergey, Vanhoucke, Vincent, Alemi, Alexander·2017·Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence

Abstract

Very deep convolutional networks have been central to the largest advances in image recognition performance in recent years. One example is the Inception architecture that has been shown to achieve very good performance at relatively low computational cost. Recently, the introduction of residual connections in conjunction with a more traditional architecture has yielded state-of-the-art performance in the 2015 ILSVRC challenge; its performance was similar to the latest generation Inception-v3 network. This raises the question: Are there any benefits to combining Inception architectures with residual connections? Here we give clear empirical evidence that training with residual connections accelerates the training of Inception networks significantly. There is also some evidence of residual Inception networks outperforming similarly expensive Inception networks without residual connections by a thin margin. We also present several new streamlined architectures for both residual and non-residual Inception networks. These variations improve the single-frame recognition performance on the ILSVRC 2012 classification task significantly. We further demonstrate how proper activation scaling stabilizes the training of very wide residual Inception networks. With an ensemble of three residual and one Inception-v4 networks, we achieve 3.08% top-5 error on the test set of the ImageNet classification (CLS) challenge.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1609/aaai.v31i1.11231

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • In the majority of vehicle detection systems, DL models are trained using weights of pre-trained models based on large-scale datasets such as MS-COCO.

    “In addition, in the majority of vehicle detection systems DL models are trained using weights of pre-trained models based on large scale datasets such as MS-COCO dataset [78], which contains regular and high resolution images in their natural context.”

    From A Systematic Review of Drone Based Road Traffic Monitoring System (2022) · cites this paper as [78]

    The Experimental Results section says pre-trained weights for the paper’s models are available, and the Introduction discusses applying convolutional architectures to object detection. Neither passage establishes that most vehicle-detection systems use pre-trained weights or that those weights come from MS-COCO; the paper instead identifies ILSVRC12 as its benchmark. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Using a pre-trained model trained on ground-viewpoint images such as MS-COCO and ImageNet leads to weak performance in detecting vehicles from UAVs because the captured images have different characteristics.

    “The use of a pre-trained model, trained on images captured from a ground viewpoint such as MS-COCO [78] and Imagenet [57] datasets, leads to weak performance in the detection of vehicles from UAVs, due to the different characteristics of the captured images.”

    From A Systematic Review of Drone Based Road Traffic Monitoring System (2022) · cites this paper as [78]

    The Introduction and Experimental Results describe Inception models trained and evaluated on the ImageNet/ILSVRC benchmark. They do not assess UAV vehicle detection or say that differences between ground-view and UAV images cause weak performance. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Multi-scale convolutional layer and convolution of length 1 enable IENet to extract rich high-dimensional features with limited parameters.

    “where multi-scale convolutional layer and convolution of length 1 enable model to extract rich high-dimensional features with limited parameters.”

    From IENet: a robust convolutional neural network for EEG based brain-computer interfaces (2022) · cites this paper as [19]

    The Residual Inception Blocks section describes a 1 × 1 convolution that expands filter-bank dimensionality, and the Related Work section says a 1 × 1 convolution can reduce computational cost (page numbers unavailable). The paper also says its Inception models keep parameter counts in check, but it does not evaluate IENet or establish that these layers enable IENet to extract rich features with limited parameters. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Szegedy et al. proposed Inception-ResNet and Inception-V3/4 as upgraded types of Inception-V1/2.

    “Szegedy et al. [103, 109, 110] proposed Inception-ResNet and Inception-V3/4 as upgraded types of Inception-V1/2.”

    From Review of deep learning: concepts, CNN architectures, challenges, applications, future directions (2021) · cites this paper as [109]

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Since drone images have aerial views with occlusions, varying sizes and orientations, employing DL models pre-trained on datasets such as Imagenet and MS-COCO might not provide high performance.

    “However, since drone images have aerial views with occlusions, varying sizes and orientations, employing DL models pre-trained on datasets such as Imagenet [57] and MS-COCO [78] datasets might not provide high performance.”

    From A Systematic Review of Drone Based Road Traffic Monitoring System (2022) · cites this paper as [78]

    The Introduction (page unavailable) identifies ImageNet as an image-recognition benchmark, and the Experimental Results report performance on that benchmark. Our copy does not address drone imagery, its occlusions or varied viewpoints, or whether ImageNet- or MS-COCO-pre-trained models perform poorly on drone images. Searches for those terms and for aerial-image transfer learning found no supporting passage. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Szegedy, C., Ioffe, S., Vanhoucke, V., & Alemi, A.
Affiliations
Google (United States) (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence
Published
2017-02-12
Volume
31
Issue
1
ISSN
  • 2159-5399 (ISSN-L)
  • 2374-3468
OpenAlex
W2274287116
Cited by
4,636
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 95 · 2024: 154 · 2023: 225 · 2022: 260 · 2021: 1149 · 2020: 992 · 2019: 896 · 2018: 543 · 2017: 258 · 2016: 50 · 2012: 2
FWCI
211.76
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings
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
Inception-v4, Inception-ResNet, skip connections, image classification, training acceleration, network architecture design, ensemble learning, ImageNet classification

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