Grapy-ML: Graph Pyramid Mutual Learning for Cross-Dataset Human Parsing
Open accessAbstract
Human parsing, or human body part semantic segmentation, has been an active research topic due to its wide potential applications. In this paper, we propose a novel GRAph PYramid Mutual Learning (Grapy-ML) method to address the cross-dataset human parsing problem, where the annotations are at different granularities. Starting from the prior knowledge of the human body hierarchical structure, we devise a graph pyramid module (GPM) by stacking three levels of graph structures from coarse granularity to fine granularity subsequently. At each level, GPM utilizes the self-attention mechanism to model the correlations between context nodes. Then, it adopts a top-down mechanism to progressively refine the hierarchical features through all the levels. GPM also enables efficient mutual learning. Specifically, the network weights of the first two levels are shared to exchange the learned coarse-granularity information across different datasets. By making use of the multi-granularity labels, Grapy-ML learns a more discriminative feature representation and achieves state-of-the-art performance, which is demonstrated by extensive experiments on the three popular benchmarks, e.g. CIHP dataset. The source code is publicly available at https://github.com/Charleshhy/Grapy-ML.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Semantic segmentation in subareas such as medical image segmentation, road detection, and human parsing is useful in various AIoT applications.
“Semantic segmentation in many subareas such as medical image segmentation [75], road detection [85], and human parsing [86], are useful in various AIoT applications.”
From Empowering things with intelligence: a survey of the progress, challenges, and opportunities in artificial intelligence of things (2021) · cites this paper as [86]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 23 · Cited by 62
- Authors
- He, H., Zhang, J., Zhang, Q., & Tao, D.
- Affiliations
- The University of Sydney (AU)
- ORCID
- Tao, Dacheng
- Venue
- Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence
- Published
- 2020-04-03
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 07
- Pages
- 10949-10956
- ISSN
- 2159-5399 (ISSN-L)
- 2374-3468
- OpenAlex
- W2991453701
- Cited by
- 62
- References
- 23
- Citations by year
- 2025: 9 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 3
- FWCI
- 2.78
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- www.aaai.org/ (unspecified)
- Locations
- Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- AAAI Publications (The Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI)) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- Australian Research Council (FL170100117, IH180100002, DP180103424)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Human Pose and Action Recognition
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
- Keywords
- human parsing, human body part segmentation, mutual learning, self-attention, top-down refinement, feature representation learning
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